Comments by "Nununununu Nu" (@nunununununu8545) on "Valuetainment" channel.

  1. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    11
  2. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God..,,.
    9
  3. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise.
    8
  4. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king.
    7
  5. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    7
  6. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    6
  7. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    6
  8. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    6
  9. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    5
  10. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    5
  11. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    5
  12. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God....
    5
  13. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    5
  14. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    5
  15. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.,.,.
    5
  16. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.
    5
  17. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    4
  18. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    4
  19. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    4
  20. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenme
    4
  21. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"....
    4
  22. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,,,,
    4
  23. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,...
    4
  24. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king
    4
  25. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    4
  26. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,😼
    4
  27. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well....
    4
  28. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    4
  29. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    4
  30. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,....
    4
  31. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,,,
    4
  32. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he wa
    4
  33. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    4
  34. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    3
  35. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    3
  36. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz
    3
  37. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation
    3
  38. The Bible, unfortunately, for Christians doesn't support their false beliefs. man has attributed his writing to God.That’s why we see these errors and contradictions, insertions and revisions. To follow xtianity, you have to turn a blind eye to facts and not use logic. E.g 3 = 1. Or 100% man and 100% God. Or...hes God, but also son of God, etc Prior to the alleged crucifiction, Jesus says his work is complete, John 17.4 another evidence that he wasn't here to die for sins. Later, he begs God to take the crucifiction away from him. Matt 27.46. If that was his whole mission, he wouldn't have said his mission was complete, nor would he beg to be saved. It's a fact that Xmas and Easter celebrations are from satanic cults. Look it up. It's no coincidence that a religion that makes people worship Gods creation instead of him has celebrations derived from satanic cults. Every prophet before Jesus, and Jesus and his disciples, and every prophet after, worshipped God as 1 person. Never a trinity. only worshipped the father I haven't misrepresented what your scripture says. No matter how hard Satan has tried to corrupt it through trinitarian scribes, it's still easily dissected to show that what the church and Paul taught you ain't from Jesus. Thats why you only have ambiguous verses, such as me and the father are one ( disciples also one in same way further in same verse ), before Abraham was..mistranslation...even then how is that saying Jesus is God??? If you see me you've seen the father...another verse  Paul followers say is proof Jesus is God...but wait a minute, if that is literal, than that means Jesus is the Father..and that is not the xtian belief. They are 2 separate entities. It's obviously metaphoric if you read the context instead of cherry-picking. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Jesus was given authority and glory...GIVEN...God is authority. Again, how at all does this show Jesus is God? Also, Jesus says he gives this very glory to the believers. Every verse you use as evidence Jesus is God is a desperate reach, its easily debunked by the bible itself. Just mistranslstions, and interpolation and fraud. why turn a blind eye to the clear-cut unambiguous statements of Jesus proving he is not God. It defies belief. E.g  I was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD.. John 17.3 and Jesus Christ whom you sent. I go to my father AND YOUR FATHER, my God and your God... John 20.17. Jesus is a mediator between God and man. The list is endless. See other comments. You would expect trinitarianism to be all over the bible. If this was the most important message, for our salvation, why is it not there in the NT? You have one interpolation about Trinity but not in manuscripts and a confirmed interpolation and so removed by most Bibles. Then you turn to Paul's statements, a man who never met Jesus and preached opposite what Jesus preached!! Still, you remain ignorant? That is why you're considered followers of Paul and not Jesus. Then you say look at the prophesies in the OT. When we look at these prophesies we find again, verses have been changed and mistranslated to inject your falsehood. And even then, it falls apart under the smallest scrutiny. E.g. Isaiah 53.5, which is about the babylonian exile of joos, trinitarians have changed it to make out its Jesus, FACTS, ask the Jews about this verse from their book. Isaiah 9.6. The Hebrew verbs are in past tense, but again, satanic trinitarians have changed it to future tense. Then it says he will be called eternal father. Jesus is never called the father, and it is totally against their Creed that Jesus was the father. They are supposed to be separate beings, who form 1. Jesus is never referred to as the father, yet Paul followers are happy to accept this verse as a prophesy about Jesus. Then you got Isaiah 7.14, again mischievous trinitarians have mistraslated the verse to imply the virgin birth of christ. The Hebrew says "amah," meaning a young woman, but the Greek has been changed to translate as a virgin. Smh Despite the clear evidence of this falsehood, Paul followers will deny it. Sadly, one needs to remain insincere and throw logic out the window to remain on this falsehood. Sorry if this offends. Please do study, this is your salvation. Stop blaspheming our Almighty God 🙏,,,,
    3
  39. Ezekeil is called son of man more times than Jesus in the bible. Your just reachin, cos Jesus taught Islam, and the verses from Jesus prove that. So all Paul followers can do is acrobatics to somehow support this Pauline narrative
    3
  40. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,,,,,
    3
  41.  @sarahrose7269  why would you lose patience when we show you from the bible?
    3
  42. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    3
  43.  @sarahrose7269  why do you think they needed to add the trinity later? i hope you saw the verses above about the Prophet Jesus, pay close attention to the last 2 verses where Jesus is referring to himself as a prophet. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version.
    3
  44. Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.
    3
  45.  @CantIllaoiThat  First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense. For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.” The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense. In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25. Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense!
    3
  46. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.
    3
  47. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God...
    3
  48.  @Chartail1  What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    3
  49. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    3
  50. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    3
  51. as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame
    3
  52. They mistranslate our scripture from planner to d.seev.r. Meanwhile God and Jesus of the bible r proud d.seev. rs Jeremiah 20:7 O Lord, You have d.seev.d me and I was d.seev.ed; You have overcome me and prevailed. I have become a laughingstock all day long; Everyone mox me. Jeremiah 4:10 Then I said, “Ah, Lord God! Surely You have utterly dsee.vd. this people and Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace’; whereas a 5w0.ord touches the thr04.t.” 2 Thessalonians 2:11 For this reason God will send upon them a d.luding influence so that they will believe what is false, 1 Kings 22:22 The Lord said to him, ‘How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a d.seev.ing spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.’ 1 Kings 22:23 Now therefore, behold, the Lord has put a dseev.ng spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and the Lord has proclaimed disaster against you.”
    3
  53. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was....
    3
  54. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    3
  55. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you.
    3
  56. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    3
  57. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,,,
    3
  58. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,
    3
  59. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical.
    3
  60. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,
    3
  61. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    3
  62. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    3
  63. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz
    3
  64. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment
    3
  65. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    3
  66. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    3
  67. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    3
  68. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    3
  69. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    3
  70. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    3
  71. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!..
    3
  72. Jesus said over and over, he was sent ONLY for the lost sheep of Israel, he wasnt sent for us, nor did he bring anythin new. christianity is the teachings of Paul and the church. Jesus taught Isam. the only religion God gave us matt 23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” matt 10 5These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. the fa.Yke comission matt 28.19 isnt found in any manuscript befire the 3rd century. Not only did they add in that " paulanity was now to be spread to the world" they also had to add in the trinity to this fr40..wd added to the end of matthew
    3
  73. The telling thing is that Jesus never ever claims he dies for the s77ns of the g1lt33. Nor did he teach riginlal s77n. Paul made it all up. Read eze 1820 This alone proves paulanity is from the shayyy. Tannne
    3
  74.  @Mr.Potts05  Jesus was the WAY for the lost sheep of Israel. Every prophet was THE WAY for the ppl they were sent to. Jesus never taught pauls story of Jesus tonement, nor riginal s77n..wake up sleepy
    3
  75.  @Rahkvyo  no, he was a prophet and messiah sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. Cyrus is a messiah in the bible.
    3
  76.  @NEWCO94  hi, son and father were not literal terms. It's metaphoric. John 20.17..I go to my father and your father, my God and your God. David is a begotten son, Adam is a son of God etc Allah is not the Literal son of anyone. The language of the time used those words son and father as terms of endearment
    3
  77. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    3
  78. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..🎉
    3
  79. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!.
    2
  80. Jesus said over and over, he was sent ONLY for the lost sheep of Israel, he wasnt sent for us, nor did he bring anythin new. christianity is the teachings of Paul and the church. Jesus taught Isam. the only religion God gave us matt 23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” matt 10 5These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. the fa.Yke comission matt 28.19 isnt found in any manuscript befire the 3rd century. Not only did they add in that " paulanity was now to be spread to the world" they also had to add in the trinity to this fr40..wd added to the end of matthew
    2
  81. 1 Timothy 2:8-15 ESV / 38 helpful votes I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
    2
  82. What about “He who is without s77n, should k4st the f1r5t”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well....
    2
  83. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was.....
    2
  84. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š,,,,x
    2
  85. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,...
    2
  86. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,
    2
  87. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenm
    2
  88.  @sarahrose7269  I'm shocked at how little you know about your own scriptures. Please verify and you will see nothing was made up.
    2
  89.  @nholmes86  Jesus spoke aramaic But the Bible was not written in the language of Jesus. It was written in cornaic Greek. You dint have the original language. Nothing was preserved. The Bible has been translated from the Greek to English. The Qur'an, not only do we have the preserved language, we also have translations to every language. Honestly what are these weak arguments?
    2
  90. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,....
    2
  91. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    2
  92. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you
    2
  93. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was,,,,
    2
  94. Critics as usual apply ‘cut and choose’ approach with regards to this passage (Quran 2:191). They only quote, “And ciw them wherever you find them
(2:191). However, when we read the passage in its context (2:190-195) it says opposite what they portray of the verse. Quran 2:190 – 195 2:190 Fight in the way of God those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. God does not like transgressors. 2:191 And ciw them wherever you find them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah [Persecution] is worse than kiwing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kiw them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. 2:192 And if they cease, then indeed, God is Forgiving and Merciful. 2:193 Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah [Persecution] and [until] worship is for God. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors. 2:194 [Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear God and know that God is with those who fear Him. 2:195 And spend in the way of God and do not throw [yourselves] with your [own] hands into destruction [by refraining]. And do good; indeed, God loves the doers of good. It’s important whenever one reads a Quranic verse, to read it in its context. As you have read, critics only quote the part which suites them, they isolate previous verses and the ones after. When the passage is examined in context, it is clear that nowhere does it sanction the kiwing of innocent people. From verse 2:190 to 2:195, when read, Allah makes it evident to fight those only who fight them, fighting in self-defence. Another thing some love to do with the verse is, change the Arabic word’s meaning. Example, the Arabic word ‘Fitna’ used in 2:191 and 2:193, they deceptively have translated the word as ‘disbelief’. So, when it’s read in that perspective, the passage is implying to fight to those who are disbelievers, just because of their religion. This again when we examine it, it will turn out to be a lie. The Arabic word ‘Fitnah’ means ‘persecution’, ‘corruption’, ‘sedition’. But when the word ‘Fitnah’ is used in verse 2:191 and 2:193 it means ‘persecution’.
    2
  95. Sheik uthman in you ess. Same happened to him, but by a grown Christian man.
    2
  96. Sadly it got no coverage cos it didn't fulfil the narrative
    2
  97. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..❀
    2
  98. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was😼😼
    2
  99. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€ŠđŸ˜ą
    2
  100. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world!
    2
  101. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    2
  102. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.,.,.
    2
  103. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.,.,.
    2
  104. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,...
    2
  105. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you....
    2
  106. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was,
    2
  107. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    2
  108. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    2
  109. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,,,
    2
  110. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    2
  111. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    2
  112. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    2
  113. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    2
  114. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.,,
    2
  115. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    2
  116. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    2
  117. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    2
  118. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    2
  119. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,🎉
    2
  120. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was😅😼
    2
  121. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€ŠđŸŽ‰
    2
  122. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.❀
    2
  123. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13...,,.
    1
  124. dont you belive your God was made n3kk.ed, yoo. mill. ated and un. ali83d against his wishes by men?
    1
  125. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,..,
    1
  126. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,..
    1
  127. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.
    1
  128. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  129. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt...,.
    1
  130. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,
    1
  131. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,,.
    1
  132. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,...
    1
  133. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,..
    1
  134. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  135. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt....,.,.
    1
  136. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,..
    1
  137. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  138. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,
    1
  139. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. ..
    1
  140. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.,,
    1
  141. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God,,
    1
  142. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!,,,
    1
  143. Christian ministers, the ones with oly spirit, are knwon for gruu mhing 8oys Muhammed was in an arranged marriage, not lu57in,,.
    1
  144. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame,,
    1
  145. 👉 Jesus: I didn't come to a80..7ish the Laws! (Matt 5.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No, you came to a8.o071sh it all! The law brings r4.th, and where there is no law, there is no trniz. Gr3sion! This is what Paul said! 👉 Jesus: If you love me keep my commandments! (John 14.15) đŸ€Š The Church: No, don't listen to him Christians! If you love him then keep the Church Commandments built by Paul, the early Christian purs3. Cute. T0.r! 👉 Jesus: I never ate p0.k and so you should as God Commanded! (John 7.19) đŸ€Š The Church: No! p0.k is good! 👉 Jesus: I've finished all the work that God gave me before my departure! (John 17.4) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You waited till you ascend to heaven and came in a dream to an early Christian purs3. Kut3. T0r to negate everything you've preached for 33 years
    1
  146. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.” Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church. wake up! they had to add the trinity later Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version...,,.,
    1
  147. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king.
    1
  148. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  149. Alhamdulillah the more I see the characters of the Paul followers, the clearer it is why they won't see the truth. They do no deserve it. Just go round the comms and see how dis. 0 Nest they are, how much dbble standrds they have, how in. S77n. S33r they are It all makes perfect sense. ALHAMDULILLAH
    1
  150. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”....
    1
  151. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...
    1
  152. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,.
    1
  153. On 12 December 2021, members of Hindu right-wing groups allegedly set fire to Christian religious books in Karnataka’s Kolar district. According to a report by NDTV, this was the “38th attack on religious minorities in Karnataka in the last 12 months”. The report also said that the number of attacks on the community has increased ever since the government started considering a bill to ban forcible religious conversion.
    1
  154. On 3 October 2021, a prayer house in Roorkee was allegedly vandalised by a mob of nearly 250 people after accusing Pentecostal evangelist Prio Sadhna Potter and those present of illegal conversions.
    1
  155. The following month, members of the Bajrang Dal and the RSS allegedly vandalised a newly set up church in Delhi’s Dwarka area. The people who were participating in the Sunday prayer meeting at the Church were accused of violating the Delhi Disaster Management Act (DDMA) guidelines as the premises had not been officially registered as a religious site.
    1
  156. A year later, amidst the festivities of Christmas, a spate of attacks against Christians angered the community. They eventually staged a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar a few weeks ago, saying that, “Our people are being beaten up.”
    1
  157. The first attack among these was on December 20, 2022, when a man dressed up as Santa Claus was beaten up by a Hindutva mob in a residential colony in the Makarpura area, Vadodara in Gujarat. According to media reports, the victim, Shashikant Dabhi, dressed up as Santa Claus entered the Avdhoot society in Makarpura where Christian families were celebrating the Christmas fervor.,.,.
    1
  158. Delhi in that year saw a whole of six attacks on Churches and a Christian school - which included alleged arson attacks on churches in Rohini and Dilshad Garden along with acts of vandalism in churches in Jasola and Vikaspuri.
    1
  159. Fast-forward a couple of years, at least 305 incidents of violence against Christians were recorded in the first nine months of 2021, according to a fact-finding report released by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, United Against Hate, and United Christian Forum. Some of these have been reported from states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.,.
    1
  160. pitted as the worst year for Indian Christians in the history of post-Independence India, according to a similar report released by the Catholic Secular Forum (CSF). The forum compiles statistics with regard to cases of religious persecution of Christians for decades. Their data shows there have been at least 365 major attacks on community members as well as institutions for practising and spreading their faith.,,.
    1
  161. The same year saw another wave of attacks directed against Christian churches and prayer halls in Karnataka by the Hindu organisation Bajrang Dal. The violence first erupted on 14 September when about 20 churches were vandalised in various districts of Karnataka including Mangalore, Udupi, and Chikkamagaluru among others. During the same attacks, several symbols of Christianity were under threat in Tamil Nadu. Three churches in Erode and Karur districts were stoned, a statue of Mother Mary in Krishnagiri was stolen and an idol of Jesus in Madurai was vandalised - all in over five days.,.,.
    1
  162. Deut 20ten) As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in 4ced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kcil every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plnder. You may enjoy the spoils of your 3nmies that the LORD your God has given you. What kind of God/Jesus approves of this?,,.,.
    1
  163. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  164. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  165. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,..
    1
  166. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,..
    1
  167. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,,.
    1
  168. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt...,
    1
  169. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,..
    1
  170. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  171. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  172. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,..
    1
  173. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  174. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  175. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..
    1
  176. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,,.,.
    1
  177. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,......,,
    1
  178. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  179. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,....,,.
    1
  180. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,,
    1
  181. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....,.,..
    1
  182. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  183. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations...
    1
  184. On 12 December 2021, members of Hindu right-wing groups allegedly set fire to Christian religious books in Karnataka’s Kolar district. According to a report by NDTV, this was the “38th attack on religious minorities in Karnataka in the last 12 months”. The report also said that the number of attacks on the community has increased ever since the government started considering a bill to ban forcible religious conversion...
    1
  185. On 3 October 2021, a prayer house in Roorkee was allegedly vandalised by a mob of nearly 250 people after accusing Pentecostal evangelist Prio Sadhna Potter and those present of illegal conversions.
    1
  186. The following month, members of the Bajrang Dal and the RSS allegedly vandalised a newly set up church in Delhi’s Dwarka area. The people who were participating in the Sunday prayer meeting at the Church were accused of violating the Delhi Disaster Management Act (DDMA) guidelines as the premises had not been officially registered as a religious site. A year later, amidst the festivities of Christmas, a spate of attacks against Christians angered the community. They eventually staged a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar a few weeks ago, saying that, “Our people are being beaten up.”
    1
  187. The first attack among these was on December 20, 2022, when a man dressed up as Santa Claus was beaten up by a Hindutva mob in a residential colony in the Makarpura area, Vadodara in Gujarat. According to media reports, the victim, Shashikant Dabhi, dressed up as Santa Claus entered the Avdhoot society in Makarpura where Christian families were celebrating the Christmas fervor.,.,.
    1
  188. Delhi in that year saw a whole of six attacks on Churches and a Christian school - which included alleged arson attacks on churches in Rohini and Dilshad Garden along with acts of vandalism in churches in Jasola and Vikaspuri. Fast-forward a couple of years, at least 305 incidents of violence against Christians were recorded in the first nine months of 2021, according to a fact-finding report released by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, United Against Hate, and United Christian Forum. Some of these have been reported from states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.,.
    1
  189. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,., whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.
    1
  190. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,,
    1
  191. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., from Jesus of the bible who they say was always God!
    1
  192. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,
    1
  193. Hinduism does allow killing. The general thumb rule is that it has to comply with one's dharma. If one is a king, he is allowed to kill if he is convinced that dharma is threatened. However, if a king kills ruthlessly for no reason, it accounts to sin. Likewise, a butcher earns a livelihood by killing animals for meat. So he is allowed to kill (animals).
    1
  194.  @ShashankaPappala  go and check the news in India and what they are doing to the non ind00s
    1
  195. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  196. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  197. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  198. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  199. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  200. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,.,
    1
  201. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,,
    1
  202. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.,
    1
  203. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,.
    1
  204. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,..
    1
  205. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  206. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,/.
    1
  207. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt
    1
  208. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,...
    1
  209. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well
    1
  210. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  211. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  212. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  213. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  214. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  215. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  216. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  217. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical.
    1
  218. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  219. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  220. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  221. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  222. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  223. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  224. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  225. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  226. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  227. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  228. The Bible, unfortunately, for Christians doesn't support their false beliefs. man has attributed his writing to God.That’s why we see these errors and contradictions, insertions and revisions. To follow xtianity, you have to turn a blind eye to facts and not use logic. E.g 3 = 1. Or 100% man and 100% God. Or...hes God, but also son of God, etc Prior to the alleged crucifiction, Jesus says his work is complete, John 17.4 another evidence that he wasn't here to die for sins. Later, he begs God to take the crucifiction away from him. Matt 27.46. If that was his whole mission, he wouldn't have said his mission was complete, nor would he beg to be saved. It's a fact that Xmas and Easter celebrations are from satanic cults. Look it up. It's no coincidence that a religion that makes people worship Gods creation instead of him has celebrations derived from satanic cults. Every prophet before Jesus, and Jesus and his disciples, and every prophet after, worshipped God as 1 person. Never a trinity. only worshipped the father I haven't misrepresented what your scripture says. No matter how hard Satan has tried to corrupt it through trinitarian scribes, it's still easily dissected to show that what the church and Paul taught you ain't from Jesus. Thats why you only have ambiguous verses, such as me and the father are one ( disciples also one in same way further in same verse ), before Abraham was..mistranslation...even then how is that saying Jesus is God??? If you see me you've seen the father...another verse  Paul followers say is proof Jesus is God...but wait a minute, if that is literal, than that means Jesus is the Father..and that is not the xtian belief. They are 2 separate entities. It's obviously metaphoric if you read the context instead of cherry-picking. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Jesus was given authority and glory...GIVEN...God is authority. Again, how at all does this show Jesus is God? Also, Jesus says he gives this very glory to the believers. Every verse you use as evidence Jesus is God is a desperate reach, its easily debunked by the bible itself. Just mistranslstions, and interpolation and fraud. why turn a blind eye to the clear-cut unambiguous statements of Jesus proving he is not God. It defies belief. E.g  I was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD.. John 17.3 and Jesus Christ whom you sent. I go to my father AND YOUR FATHER, my God and your God... John 20.17. Jesus is a mediator between God and man. The list is endless. See other comments. You would expect trinitarianism to be all over the bible. If this was the most important message, for our salvation, why is it not there in the NT? You have one interpolation about Trinity but not in manuscripts and a confirmed interpolation and so removed by most Bibles. Then you turn to Paul's statements, a man who never met Jesus and preached opposite what Jesus preached!! Still, you remain ignorant? That is why you're considered followers of Paul and not Jesus. Then you say look at the prophesies in the OT. When we look at these prophesies we find again, verses have been changed and mistranslated to inject your falsehood. And even then, it falls apart under the smallest scrutiny. E.g. Isaiah 53.5, which is about the babylonian exile of joos, trinitarians have changed it to make out its Jesus, FACTS, ask the Jews about this verse from their book. Isaiah 9.6. The Hebrew verbs are in past tense, but again, satanic trinitarians have changed it to future tense. Then it says he will be called eternal father. Jesus is never called the father, and it is totally against their Creed that Jesus was the father. They are supposed to be separate beings, who form 1. Jesus is never referred to as the father, yet Paul followers are happy to accept this verse as a prophesy about Jesus. Then you got Isaiah 7.14, again mischievous trinitarians have mistraslated the verse to imply the virgin birth of christ. The Hebrew says "amah," meaning a young woman, but the Greek has been changed to translate as a virgin. Smh Despite the clear evidence of this falsehood, Paul followers will deny it. Sadly, one needs to remain insincere and throw logic out the window to remain on this falsehood. Sorry if this offends. Please do study, this is your salvation. Stop blaspheming our Almighty God 🙏
    1
  229. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction.
    1
  230. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  231. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,.,
    1
  232. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,
    1
  233. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.,.
    1
  234. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.
    1
  235. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,.
    1
  236. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,,.
    1
  237. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.
    1
  238. Luke Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over themâ€”đŸ˜„đŸ˜„đŸ˜„ bring them heređŸ˜„ and **
    1
  239. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. — 1 Timothy 2:12, KJV
    1
  240. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus : You have the same father(Creator in Bible lingo) and God as me. Same relation, i'm not literally begotten. (John 20.17 also Psalm 2.7 where David is begotten) đŸ€Š The Church: No! you are the ONLY begotten son of God (NIV has removed the word begotten from John 3.16 as they confirm it wasnt right) 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus : You have the same father(Creator in Bible lingo) and God as me. Same relation, I'm not unique in that sense. (John 20.17 also Psalm 2.7 where David is begotten) đŸ€Š The Church: No! you are the ONLY begotten son of God (NIV has removed the word begotten from John kjv as they confirm it wasnt correct previously) 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!..
    1
  241. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  242.  @joao_almeida3504  I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  243.  @joao_almeida3504  Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  244.  @joao_almeida3504  Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  245.  @joao_almeida3504  For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  246.  @joao_almeida3504  yes of course. Jesus was the WAY to God, life every prophet was THE WAY, for the people they were sent to. Jesus was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel to reaffirm the law. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he bringing anything new
    1
  247.  @rebeccasieradzki528  unlike the bible, Islam doesn't tell anyone to be violent to innocent ppl. It told the ppl of the time to defend themselves. To this day, the Bible is used against innocent ppl. Just look at what's happening in 15.ra.h43l
    1
  248. Jesus said over and over, he was sent ONLY for the lost sheep of Israel, he wasnt sent for us, nor did he bring anythin new. christianity is the teachings of Paul and the church. Jesus taught Isam. the only religion God gave us matt 23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” matt 10 5These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. the fa.Yke comission matt 28.19 isnt found in any manuscript befire the 3rd century. Not only did they add in that " paulanity was now to be spread to the world" they also had to add in the trinity to this fr40..wd added to the end of matthew
    1
  249.  @joao_almeida3504  run lil boy
    1
  250. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!.
    1
  251. 👉 Jesus: I didn't come to a80..7ish the Laws! (Matt 5.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No, you came to a8.o071sh it all! The law brings r4.th, and where there is no law, there is no trniz. Gr3sion! This is what Paul said! 👉 Jesus: If you love me keep my commandments! (John 14.15) đŸ€Š The Church: No, don't listen to him Christians! If you love him then keep the Church Commandments built by Paul, the early Christian purs3. Cute. T0.r! 👉 Jesus: I never ate p0.k and so you should as God Commanded! (John 7.19) đŸ€Š The Church: No! p0.k is good! 👉 Jesus: I've finished all the work that God gave me before my departure! (John 17.4) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You waited till you ascend to heaven and came in a dream to an early Christian purs3. Kut3. T0r to negate everything you've preached for 33 years!
    1
  252. Contrary to what is alleged by bigots like Bill Maher, Muslims are not more violent than people of other religions. Murder rates in most of the Muslim world are very low compared to the United States. As for political violence, people of Christian heritage in the twentieth century polished off tens of millions of people in the two world wars and colonial repression. This massive carnage did not occur because European Christians are worse than or different from other human beings, but because they were the first to industrialize war and pursue a national model. Sometimes it is argued that they did not act in the name of religion but of nationalism. But, really, how naive. Religion and nationalism are closely intertwined. The British monarch is the head of the Church of England, and that still meant something in the first half of the twentieth century, at least. The Swedish church is a national church. Spain? Was it really unconnected to Catholicism? Did the Church and Francisco Franco’s feelings toward it play no role in the Civil War? And what’s sauce for the goose: much Muslim violence is driven by forms of modern nationalism, too. I don’t figure that Muslims killed more than a 2 million people or so in political violence in the entire twentieth century, and that mainly in the Iran-Iraq War 1980-1988 and the Soviet and post-Soviet wars in Afghanistan, for which Europeans bear some blame. Compare that to the Christian European tally of, oh, lets say 100 million (16 million in WW I, 60 million in WW II– though some of those were attributable to Buddhists in Asia– and millions more in colonial wars.) Belgium– yes, the Belgium of strawberry beer and quaint Gravensteen castle– conquered the Congo and is estimated to have killed off half of its inhabitants over time, some 8 million people at least. Or, between 1916-1930 Tsarist Russian and then Soviet forces — facing the revolt of Central Asians trying to throw off Christian (and then Marxist), European rule — Russian forces killed an estimated 1.5 million people. Two boys brought up in or born in one of those territories (Kyrgyzstan) just killed 4 people and wounded others critically. That is horrible, but no one, whether in Russia or in Europe or in North America has the slightest idea that Central Asians were mass-murdered during WW I and before and after, and looted of much of their wealth. Russia when it brutally conquered and ruled the Caucasus and Central Asia was an Eastern Orthodox, Christian empire (and seems to be reemerging as one!). Then, between half a million and a million Algerians died in that country’s war of independence from France, 1954-1962, at a time when the population was only 11 million! I could go on and on. Everywhere you dig in European colonialism in Afro-Asia, there are bodies. Lots of bodies. Now that I think of it, maybe 100 million people killed by people of European Christian heritage in the twentieth century is an underestimate.
    1
  253.  @rebeccasieradzki528  As for religious terrorism, that too is universal. Admittedly, some groups deploy terrorism as a tactic more at some times than others. Zionists in British Mandate Palestine were active terrorists in the 1940s, from a British point of view, and in the period 1965-1980, the FBI considered the Jewish Defense League among the most active US terrorist groups. (Members at one point plotted to assassinate Rep. Dareell Issa (R-CA) because of his Lebanese heritage.) Now that Jewish nationalsts are largely getting their way, terrorism has declined among them. But it would likely reemerge if they stopped getting their way. In fact, one of the arguments Israeli politicians give for allowing Israeli squatters to keep the Palestinian land in the West Bank that they have usurped is that attempting to move them back out would produce violence. I.e., the settlers not only actually terrorize the Palestinians, but they form a terrorism threat for Israel proper (as the late prime minister Yitzhak Rabin discovered). Even more recently, it is difficult for me to see much of a difference between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and Baruch Goldstein, perpetrator of the Hebron massacre. Or there was the cold-blooded bombing of the Ajmer shrine in India by Bhavesh Patel and a gang of Hindu nationalists. Chillingly, they were disturbed when a second bomb they had set did not go off, so that they did not wreak as much havoc as they would have liked. Ajmer is an ecumenical Sufi shrine also visited by Hindus, and these bigots wanted to stop such open-minded sharing of spiritual spaces because they hate Muslims. Buddhists have committed a lot of terrorism and other violence as well. Many in the Zen orders in Japan supported militarism in the first half of the twentieth century, for which their leaders later apologized. And, you had Inoue Shiro’s assassination campaign in 1930s Japan. Nowadays militant Buddhist monks in Burma/ Myanmar are urging on an ethnic cleansing campaign against the Rohingya. As for Christianity, the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda initiated hostilitiesthat displaced two million people. Although it is an African cult, it is Christian in origin and the result of Western Christian missionaries preaching in Africa. If Saudi Wahhabi preachers can be in part blamed for the Taliban, why do Christian missionaries skate when we consider the blowback from their pupils? Despite the very large number of European Muslims, in 2007-2009 less than 1 percent of terrorist acts in that continent were committed by people from that community. Terrorism is a tactic of extremists within each religion, and within secular religions of Marxism or nationalism. No religion, including Islam, preaches indiscriminate violence against innocents. It takes a peculiar sort of blindness to see Christians of European heritage as “nice” and Muslims and inherently violent, given the twentieth century death toll I mentioned above. Human beings are human beings and the species is too young and too interconnected to have differentiated much from group to group. People resort to violence out of ambition or grievance, and the more powerful they are, the more violence they seem to commit. The good news is that the number of wars is declining over time, and World War II, the biggest charnel house in history, hasn’t been repeated.
    1
  254.  @suunata2120  it actually says PLANNER. Jesus/God of the bible will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia, Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12
    1
  255.  @suunata2120  2 Thessalonians 2:11 Verse Concepts For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false,
    1
  256.  @suunata2120  Jeremiah 20:7 Verse Concepts O Lord, You have deceived me and I was deceived; You have overcome me and prevailed. I have become a laughingstock all day long; Everyone mocks me.
    1
  257.  @suunata2120  1 Kings 22:22 Verse Concepts The Lord said to him, ‘How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.’
    1
  258. Bruce Metzger, the premier New Testament textual critic, writes: “Matthew and Luke suppress or weaken references in Mark to such human emotions of Jesus as grief and anger and amazement as well as Jesus’ unrequited love; they also omit Mark’s statement that Jesus’ friends thought he was beside himself”. He explains further, that: “The later gospels omit what might imply that Jesus was unable to accomplish what he willed
and also omit questions asked by Jesus which might be taken to imply his ignorance.”[3]
    1
  259. Metzger continues further by enumerating instances where Matthew and Luke soften Mark’s statements which might minimize the majesty of Jesus and replaced it with illustrations of a more alluring and authoritative Jesus. In the story of the fig tree as found in Mark, the disciples did not notice the withering of the tree until next morning. For Matthew, this seemed less dramatic and unimpressive, and hence in his narrative the tree withered at once, leaving the disciples in shock and amazement. Matthew and Luke were adamant in changing the words of Jesus. They wanted to make Jesus say what they wanted people to believe, “reflecting a later stage of theological understanding than that in Mark.” (Metzger, pg 83) It seems quite clear that during both the pre and post gospel stages of the gospel traditions transmission, the available material was molded, filtered and changed in direct correlation to the Christological convictions of those who handled the traditions. It is important to stress that this is not a case of the evangelists’ mere differing in emphasis; rather there are numerous occasions when the later gospel writers go out of their way to modify and alter the earlier version. Therefore, if we wish to come close to the historical Jesus in the gospels, it is a good starting point to compare the stories in the various gospels, to discern where the story has altered.
    1
  260.  @rebeccasieradzki528  actually look up the number. If you look at 20th century. Its all Christianity. If you look at 21st century. Again, Islam is not the winner. All religions are the same. Then look at media representation, and you will find anything muslims do, is blamed on Islam by the media, and overrepresented 1000% than any other religion. Go and look up the statistics. These facts can all be verified
    1
  261.  @paulblueosyter1472  neither did Muhammad, kil anyone outside of woah. But when Jesus comes back, why will he cwi77 me?
    1
  262.  @paulblueosyter1472  Jesus you say was ALWAYS God. So why did he give us the teachings in the Bible? Old and New? And the story of the women, was made up 10 Jens after Jesus
    1
  263.  @rebeccasieradzki528  Contrary to what is alleged by bigots like Bill Maher, Muslims are not more violent than people of other religions. Murder rates in most of the Muslim world are very low compared to the United States. As for political violence, people of Christian heritage in the twentieth century polished off tens of millions of people in the two world wars and colonial repression. This massive carnage did not occur because European Christians are worse than or different from other human beings, but because they were the first to industrialize war and pursue a national model.
    1
  264. ​ @rebeccasieradzki528  As for religious , that too is universal. Admittedly, some groups deploy as a tactic more at some times than others. Zionists in British Mandate Palestine were active terists in the 1940s, from a British point of view, and in the period 1965-1980, the FBI considered the Jewish Defense League among the most active US torist groups. (Members at one point plotted to assanate Rep. Dareell Issa (R-CA) because of his Lebanese heritage.) Now that Jewish nationalsts are largely getting their way, terism has declined among them. But it would likely reemerge if they stopped getting their way. In fact, one of the arguments Israeli politicians give for allowing Israeli squatters to keep the Palestinian land in the West Bank that they have usurped is that attempting to move them back out would produce violence. I.e., the settlers not only actually terrorize the Palestinians, but they form a terrorism threat for Israel proper (as the late prime minister Yitzhak Rabin discovered). As for Christianity, the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda initiated hostilitiesthat displaced two million people. Although it is an African cult, it is Christian in origin and the result of Western Christian missionaries preaching in Africa. If Saudi Wahhabi preachers can be in part blamed for the Taliban, why do Christian missionaries skate when we consider the blowback from their pupils? Despite the very large number of European Muslims, in 2007-2009 less than 1 percent of terrst acts in that continent were committed by people from that community. Terrsm is a tactic of extremists within each religion, and within secular religions of Marxism or nationalism. No religion, including Islam, preaches this It takes a peculiar sort of blindness to see Christians of European heritage as “nice” and Muslims and inherently violent, given the twentieth century death toll I mentioned above. Human beings are human beings and the species is too young and too interconnected to have differentiated much from group to group. People resort to violence out of ambition or grievance, and the more powerful they are, the more violence they seem to commit.
    1
  265.  @rebeccasieradzki528  ​ As for religious , that too is universal. Admittedly, some groups deploy as a tactic more at some times than others. Zionists in British Mandate Palestine were active terists in the 1940s, from a British point of view, and in the period 1965-1980, the FBI considered the Jewish Defense League among the most active US torist groups. (Members at one point plotted to assanate Rep. Dareell Issa (R-CA) because of his Lebanese heritage.) Now that Jewish nationalsts are largely getting their way, terism has declined among them. But it would likely reemerge if they stopped getting their way. In fact, one of the arguments Israeli politicians give for allowing Israeli squatters to keep the Palestinian land in the West Bank that they have usurped is that attempting to move them back out would produce violence. I.e., the settlers not only actually terrorize the Palestinians, but they form a terrsm threat for Israel proper (as the late prime minister Yitzhak Rabin discovered).
    1
  266. ​ @rebeccasieradzki528  As for Christianity, the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda initiated hostilitiesthat displaced two million people. Although it is an African cult, it is Christian in origin and the result of Western Christian missionaries preaching in Africa. If Saudi Wahhabi preachers can be in part blamed for the Taliban, why do Christian missionaries skate when we consider the blowback from their pupils? Despite the very large number of European Muslims, in 2007-2009 less than 1 percent of terrorist acts in that continent were committed by people from that community.
    1
  267.  @rebeccasieradzki528  study, the m33.dia over presents what muslims do 1000% They have a reason to do this to us. Cos they want to keep taking the oil. But also cos Islam is the truth, and its the devils ultimate plan to keep ppl away from it
    1
  268.  @rebeccasieradzki528  is is are not Muslim. They wer made by the chews. Thats. You have been bwashed by their f188s like most of the world have been
    1
  269.  @mumu9690  whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,
    1
  270. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  271. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  272. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,......
    1
  273. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  274.  @Jcp_yitlg  where? Please show us
    1
  275. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  276. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over themâ€”đŸ˜„đŸ˜„đŸ˜„ bring them heređŸ˜„ and ⚰
    1
  277. “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,,
    1
  278. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves..,
    1
  279. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  280. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.
    1
  281. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.
    1
  282. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,
    1
  283. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  284. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,..
    1
  285. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,.
    1
  286. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  287. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  288. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    1
  289. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  290. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,..,
    1
  291. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,
    1
  292. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,...
    1
  293. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  294. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  295. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,..........
    1
  296. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,.,
    1
  297. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12..,
    1
  298. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was....
    1
  299. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,,,
    1
  300. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,
    1
  301. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  302. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  303. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  304. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  305. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  306. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,
    1
  307. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,
    1
  308. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..
    1
  309. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  310. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  311. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusatio
    1
  312. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"....
    1
  313. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  314. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,...
    1
  315. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,
    1
  316. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,,,,
    1
  317. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  318. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,
    1
  319. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.........
    1
  320. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,.
    1
  321. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  322. Name one thing I made up
    1
  323. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  324. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  325. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,........
    1
  326. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  327. saiah 6:7-8 He touched my lips with the burning coal and said, “This has touched your lips, and now your guilt is gone, and your sins are forgiven.
    1
  328. Christianity’s holiest site is Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The Church marks the site where Christians falsely believe that Jesus was cruse. sified, burrd, and rose from the dw34d. The Church contains the “Stone of Unction.” It is believed that Jesus’s body was laid on this stone while being prepared for burial. Christians make pilgrimage to the Church and ritually kiss the Stone of Unction, owing to its perceived connection with God (i.e., Jesus)
    1
  329. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13...,.,
    1
  330. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,.m,m,
    1
  331. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,,.,.
    1
  332. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  333. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt......
    1
  334. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.
    1
  335. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  336. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,
    1
  337. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. ...
    1
  338. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.,.,
    1
  339. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God,,
    1
  340. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!,,,
    1
  341. Christian ministers, the ones with oly spirit, are knwon for gruu mhing 8oys Muhammed was in an arranged marriage, not lu57in,,
    1
  342. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame..
    1
  343. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,.,.
    1
  344. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,
    1
  345. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.
    1
  346. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,,
    1
  347. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt...,
    1
  348. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,...
    1
  349. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.....
    1
  350. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.......
    1
  351. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,..
    1
  352. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,
    1
  353. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,
    1
  354. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,,
    1
  355. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  356. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,.,.
    1
  357. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,
    1
  358. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  359. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.
    1
  360. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  361. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  362. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,
    1
  363. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,,,..
    1
  364. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,......,.,
    1
  365. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  366. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,....,,
    1
  367. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,..
    1
  368. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......,,.
    1
  369. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  370. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations...
    1
  371. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,
    1
  372. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt
    1
  373. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,,,,,
    1
  374. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏.....
    1
  375. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.,,,,
    1
  376.  @Disciple-ofChrist  check the last 2 verses. Referring to himself he calls himself a prophet. He never ever said he was God, not did he imply it.. You have to read divinity into his actions and metaphors. Because its not there. He was sent according to his own words according to the Bible, ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws
    1
  377.  @Disciple-ofChrist  A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  378. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.....
    1
  379. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John...
    1
  380. The Bible, unfortunately, for Christians doesn't support their false beliefs. man has attributed his writing to God.That’s why we see these errors and contradictions, insertions and revisions. To follow xtianity, you have to turn a blind eye to facts and not use logic. E.g 3 = 1. Or 100% man and 100% God. Or...hes God, but also son of God, etc Prior to the alleged crucifiction, Jesus says his work is complete, John 17.4 another evidence that he wasn't here to die for sins. Later, he begs God to take the crucifiction away from him. Matt 27.46. If that was his whole mission, he wouldn't have said his mission was complete, nor would he beg to be saved. It's a fact that Xmas and Easter celebrations are from satanic cults. Look it up. It's no coincidence that a religion that makes people worship Gods creation instead of him has celebrations derived from satanic cults. Every prophet before Jesus, and Jesus and his disciples, and every prophet after, worshipped God as 1 person. Never a trinity. only worshipped the father I haven't misrepresented what your scripture says. No matter how hard Satan has tried to corrupt it through trinitarian scribes, it's still easily dissected to show that what the church and Paul taught you ain't from Jesus. Thats why you only have ambiguous verses, such as me and the father are one ( disciples also one in same way further in same verse ), before Abraham was..mistranslation...even then how is that saying Jesus is God??? If you see me you've seen the father...another verse  Paul followers say is proof Jesus is God...but wait a minute, if that is literal, than that means Jesus is the Father..and that is not the xtian belief. They are 2 separate entities. It's obviously metaphoric if you read the context instead of cherry-picking. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Jesus was given authority and glory...GIVEN...God is authority. Again, how at all does this show Jesus is God? Also, Jesus says he gives this very glory to the believers. Every verse you use as evidence Jesus is God is a desperate reach, its easily debunked by the bible itself. Just mistranslstions, and interpolation and fraud. why turn a blind eye to the clear-cut unambiguous statements of Jesus proving he is not God. It defies belief. E.g  I was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD.. John 17.3 and Jesus Christ whom you sent. I go to my father AND YOUR FATHER, my God and your God... John 20.17. Jesus is a mediator between God and man. The list is endless. See other comments. You would expect trinitarianism to be all over the bible. If this was the most important message, for our salvation, why is it not there in the NT? You have one interpolation about Trinity but not in manuscripts and a confirmed interpolation and so removed by most Bibles. Then you turn to Paul's statements, a man who never met Jesus and preached opposite what Jesus preached!! Still, you remain ignorant? That is why you're considered followers of Paul and not Jesus. Then you say look at the prophesies in the OT. When we look at these prophesies we find again, verses have been changed and mistranslated to inject your falsehood. And even then, it falls apart under the smallest scrutiny. E.g. Isaiah 53.5, which is about the babylonian exile of joos, trinitarians have changed it to make out its Jesus, FACTS, ask the Jews about this verse from their book. Isaiah 9.6. The Hebrew verbs are in past tense, but again, satanic trinitarians have changed it to future tense. Then it says he will be called eternal father. Jesus is never called the father, and it is totally against their Creed that Jesus was the father. They are supposed to be separate beings, who form 1. Jesus is never referred to as the father, yet Paul followers are happy to accept this verse as a prophesy about Jesus. Then you got Isaiah 7.14, again mischievous trinitarians have mistraslated the verse to imply the virgin birth of christ. The Hebrew says "amah," meaning a young woman, but the Greek has been changed to translate as a virgin. Smh Despite the clear evidence of this falsehood, Paul followers will deny it. Sadly, one needs to remain insincere and throw logic out the window to remain on this falsehood. Sorry if this offends. Please do study, this is your salvation. Stop blaspheming our Almighty God 🙏
    1
  381. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  382. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,,,
    1
  383. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  384. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    1
  385. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.,,,
    1
  386. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  387. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  388. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  389. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  390. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  391. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  392. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  393. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  394. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  395. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  396. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  397. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  398. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  399.  @sarahrose7269  The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”
    1
  400. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”
    1
  401. Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.
    1
  402. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
    1
  403. Not only is the great commission doctored, Matthew is written by yet another anonymous author, a ju who copied Mark According to early church tradition, originating with Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60–130 AD),[10] the gospel was written by Matthew the companion of Jesus, but this presents numerous problems.[9] Most modern scholars hold that it was written anonymously[8] in the last quarter of the first century by a male Jew who stood on the margin between traditional and nontraditional Jewish values and who was familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time
    1
  404. So much for love your neighbours, just goes to show how uneducated Paul followers are about the n.t. Which don't forget, Jesus never saw wrote or approved And that's why hundreds of years after Jesus, they were still trying to slip in Pauline and church tales
    1
  405.  @_tom19  classic Inn.s777nseer. Pauline response. It's quite clear what was said to you from your own sources and bible
    1
  406.  @nholmes86  Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  407.  @nholmes86  For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  408. Jesus is not the only one to have had a miraculous birth, John the baptist had a miraculous birth. he was born to a b4r.r3n mother who had no eggs. Jesus was born with eggs but without 5.p3r.m. Eve was born with no mother or father, as was Adam. God simply says "Be" and it is. the whole point of the miraculous birth, is that Jesus HAD NO FATHER. that was the miracle. if God had fathered Jesus it wasnt a miracle. you said "only a God can have a miraculous birth". Do you realise what you are saying? God is never born. in the bible melchisidek, has no mother or father, no beginning and no end. no lineage. By your logic, he would be a greater "God" than Jesus.
    1
  409. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13...,
    1
  410. Muhammed taught anyone who harms a non combatant wont even smell paradise. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non combtnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins to be harm3d. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam. its shockin how much they make things up, but its cool. they wil need to answer for all their actions
    1
  411. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    1
  412. Muslims are against this. We are taught we won't even smell paradise if we do anything like this. Learn the truth about Islam, not what shayyy. Tann wants you to learn. He uses ppl like these anchors to take you away from the truth
    1
  413. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  414. Around 35 CE, a man named Saul of Tarsus came; he later changed his name to Paul. Paul was a Roman citizen, a Jew, and the enemy of Jesus Christ. He was a zealous persecutor and killer of Jesus Christ’s faithful followers. En route from Jerusalem to Damascus, Paul claimed that he saw “the light” when he saw Jesus Christ appearing to him, filled with the Holy Spirit. He was chosen and commanded to teach and preach acts that Jesus Christ never did to the masses. Paul taught concepts contradictory to what Jesus Christ and faithful followers of Jesus Christ were teaching. Paul provided no proof as to what he claimed to receive. I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. (Galatians 1:11–12)
    1
  415. While Jesus Christ is the central focus of Christianity, the founder of modern Christianity is not Jesus Christ; instead, it is Paul because the version of Christianity that has survived is not the version that Jesus Christ preached; instead, it was the version that Paul preached when he claimed Jesus Christ came to him in a vision and told him to preach new concepts. He converted to Christianity and wrongfully began calling people to worship Jesus Christ and spread strange teachings. Due to his power, wealth, and relationships, people started to adopt these strange beliefs and teachings, while the true disciples of Jesus Christ disapproved.
    1
  416. The disciples clashed and argued with Paul because of his innovative and bizarre teachings, and the New Testament references this fact. Many Christians mistakenly took him as one of the disciples of Jesus Christ due to his claim that he was, but he was not, nor did he ever meet Jesus Christ. While some Christians elevate Paul to sainthood, Paul was responsible for destroying the teachings of Jesus Christ. He told people they did not need to follow God’s laws, even though Jesus Christ suffered and struggled to convey the Message of God, which included teaching people to obey God’s commandments.
    1
  417. Many people took Paul’s word and believed him, even though Jesus Christ never violated the Laws of Moses that came before him, and even though the Bible clearly states, Till Heaven and earth pass, the one that breaks the Law will be called the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished’ ‘Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.’ (Matthew 5:18–19). This verse explicitly states that anyone that breaks the Law or teaches others to break the Law will be called the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven. On the contrary, the verse states that whoever practices and teaches the Law will be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
    1
  418. Almost all the concepts of the modern-day teachings of Christianity, including the concept of Jesus Christ being the son of God and Atonement, are from Paul — and not from the teachings of Jesus Christ. As such, the teachings of Paul contradict the teachings of Jesus.Paul met the disciples of Christ occasionally but was not fortunate enough to live in their company. When he later came into the picture after the departure of Jesus Christ, he made some severe changes to the religion to win over the Gentiles (non-Jewish people). He introduced what became vital concepts of Christianity, including the idea that Christ is the Son of God, that he sacrificed himself on the cross to save humanity, and that all one needs to do to earn Paradise is to believe Christ died for his sins. Half of the New Testament is written by this man who never met Jesus Christ in his lifetime. Yet, Christians do not question the authenticity of this ex-enemy of Jesus Christ and thus take his word as Truth.
    1
  419. The Book of Acts in the Bible holds three contradictory accounts of Paul’s so-called “conversion” when he claims he saw Jesus Christ in a vision. The story has many holes. Acts 9:7 states: The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. This verse states that the men traveling with Saul stood speechless, for they heard the voice but could not see, but in Acts 22:9, there exists an apparent contradiction. The verse states the men travailing with Paul saw the light but did not hear the voice who spoke! And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. Did the men that traveled with Paul see the light or hear the voice? Why don’t we have records of these witnesses to testify to this significant event? The answer is simple; this event never happened.
    1
  420. The New Testament that is now in existence contains more writings of Paul than any other source. All his reports were written before the four Gospels. They are influenced mainly by the teachings and innovations of Paul, even though his writings consist of hundreds of inconsistences and contradictions! Paul abolished God’s laws, such as not eating pork, fasting, observing the Sabbath, and the instruction of circumcision.
    1
  421. The early devoted followers of Jesus Christ struggled for years to uphold the teaching that only One God (the Father) should be worshiped, and Jesus Christ was only His human Messenger. The real followers of Jesus Christ opposed the blatant misrepresentations that Paul was wrongfully decimating. They had a strong understanding of his message and tried to maintain the purity and clarity of his teachings — worshipping God the Father alone and following His commandments.
    1
  422. However, Paul gave Jesus Christ’s faithful disciples a bad reputation. Paul gave these faithful disciples, who were with Jesus Christ all along — supporting and helping him, the reputation of being lazy, misguided, and hypocritical. People mistakenly believed that Paul understood the message and teachings of Jesus Christ better than the disciples, even though they lived with Jesus Christ and Paul had never met him. How bizarre is that?
    1
  423. Since the innovative teachings of Paul appealed to the Gentiles (non-Jewish people), Jesus’ faithful followers were unable to stop Paul’s misguidance. Although the first Christians were Unitarians who asserted the unity of God and would have rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, Jesus Christ’s message of the absolute Oneness of God lasted in its original purity for only a short time, then diminished over the years. The very first Christians were not Trinitarians and, in fact, never had heard of the Trinity, as many current-day Biblical scholars acknowledge.
    1
  424. Some Christians developed different beliefs about the Prophet Jesus PBUH over the next few centuries. They claimed that he was divine, calling him the Son of God, which eventually became the dominant Christian belief. Sadly, Christian leaders took Paul’s beliefs as their religion even though his teachings contradict the Bible, and Christian leaders abandoned the actual teachings of Jesus Christ. Many Biblical scholars recognize and admit that the formulation of modern Christianity did not begin with Jesus Christ; instead, the faith started with Paul, as shocking as that sounds. Sadly, Paul, not Jesus Christ, is the true founder of modern Christianity. Today, only Muslims follow the actual teachings of Jesus Chris
    1
  425.  @CantIllaoiThat  please, see above. Quotin paul means nothin, he invented this religion, never met Jesus and changed everything Jesus came with
    1
  426. ​ @CantIllaoiThat That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  427. ​ @CantIllaoiThat I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  428. ​ @CantIllaoiThat everything you use as evidence is fa75e. Verify for yourself It's no coincidence that all you can point at is Paul, and John. These are the furthest from Jesus. It's only I'm John we find the " I am " statements. And like i said, Paul made this religion, he never knew Jesus, claimed he saw him in a dream, then changed everything
    1
  429.  @CantIllaoiThat  That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible. Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially.
    1
  430.  @CantIllaoiThat  First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense. For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.” The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense. In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25. Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.” This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event. Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history. A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says. The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son.
    1
  431.  @CantIllaoiThat  Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew. Rather, “is” is understood. For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.” A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”. This name describes God, not the person who carries the name. The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body!
    1
  432.  @CantIllaoiThat  Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars. Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot. The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English. Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.” Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime.
    1
  433.  @CantIllaoiThat  Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father! And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus.
    1
  434.  @CantIllaoiThat  Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah. Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies. At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib. The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept. When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).
    1
  435.  @CantIllaoiThat  One of these is the Hebrew word alma, which was translated into Greek as meaning virgin, when in fact it refers to a young woman, betulah being the Hebrew word to refer to a pure woman, that is, a virgin. Isaiah 7:14 prophecies the birth of Emmanuel to a virgin, and is quoted in the first Chapter of Matthew, describing the virgin birth of Christ, one of the bases of Christianity. But Isaiah uses the Hebrew word amah, meaning a young woman, rather than betulah, meaning a pure woman. Matthew quotes the virgin birth as being the fulfillment of the prophet, the delivery of the Messiah. But the translation is wrong. The word amah appears only once in Isaiah (7:14) but the word betulah appears five times in the book, each time clearly in reference to a virgin (23:4, 23:12, 37:22, 47:1, and 62:5). The translation into Greek remains the source of the description of the prophecy of the virgin birth, it is not apparent in the original Hebrew
    1
  436. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,....
    1
  437. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,.,
    1
  438. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,,,
    1
  439. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.
    1
  440. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt...,,.
    1
  441. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....
    1
  442. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.......
    1
  443. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves..,
    1
  444. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  445. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!
    1
  446. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  447. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction.
    1
  448. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  449. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was😼
    1
  450. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,😱
    1
  451. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  452. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.😼
    1
  453. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  454. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  455. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,🎉
    1
  456. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..❀
    1
  457. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€ŠđŸ˜ą
    1
  458. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,😱
    1
  459. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,😼
    1
  460. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,❀
    1
  461. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,😱
    1
  462. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏😼
    1
  463. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  464. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  465. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  466. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  467. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  468. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  469. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  470. The Bible, unfortunately, for Christians doesn't support their false beliefs. man has attributed his writing to God.That’s why we see these errors and contradictions, insertions and revisions. To follow xtianity, you have to turn a blind eye to facts and not use logic. E.g 3 = 1. Or 100% man and 100% God. Or...hes God, but also son of God, etc Prior to the alleged crucifiction, Jesus says his work is complete, John 17.4 another evidence that he wasn't here to die for sins. Later, he begs God to take the crucifiction away from him. Matt 27.46. If that was his whole mission, he wouldn't have said his mission was complete, nor would he beg to be saved. It's a fact that Xmas and Easter celebrations are from satanic cults. Look it up. It's no coincidence that a religion that makes people worship Gods creation instead of him has celebrations derived from satanic cults. Every prophet before Jesus, and Jesus and his disciples, and every prophet after, worshipped God as 1 person. Never a trinity. only worshipped the father I haven't misrepresented what your scripture says. No matter how hard Satan has tried to corrupt it through trinitarian scribes, it's still easily dissected to show that what the church and Paul taught you ain't from Jesus. Thats why you only have ambiguous verses, such as me and the father are one ( disciples also one in same way further in same verse ), before Abraham was..mistranslation...even then how is that saying Jesus is God??? If you see me you've seen the father...another verse  Paul followers say is proof Jesus is God...but wait a minute, if that is literal, than that means Jesus is the Father..and that is not the xtian belief. They are 2 separate entities. It's obviously metaphoric if you read the context instead of cherry-picking. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Jesus was given authority and glory...GIVEN...God is authority. Again, how at all does this show Jesus is God? Also, Jesus says he gives this very glory to the believers. Every verse you use as evidence Jesus is God is a desperate reach, its easily debunked by the bible itself. Just mistranslstions, and interpolation and fraud. why turn a blind eye to the clear-cut unambiguous statements of Jesus proving he is not God. It defies belief. E.g  I was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD.. John 17.3 and Jesus Christ whom you sent. I go to my father AND YOUR FATHER, my God and your God... John 20.17. Jesus is a mediator between God and man. The list is endless. See other comments. You would expect trinitarianism to be all over the bible. If this was the most important message, for our salvation, why is it not there in the NT? You have one interpolation about Trinity but not in manuscripts and a confirmed interpolation and so removed by most Bibles. Then you turn to Paul's statements, a man who never met Jesus and preached opposite what Jesus preached!! Still, you remain ignorant? That is why you're considered followers of Paul and not Jesus. Then you say look at the prophesies in the OT. When we look at these prophesies we find again, verses have been changed and mistranslated to inject your falsehood. And even then, it falls apart under the smallest scrutiny. E.g. Isaiah 53.5, which is about the babylonian exile of joos, trinitarians have changed it to make out its Jesus, FACTS, ask the Jews about this verse from their book. Isaiah 9.6. The Hebrew verbs are in past tense, but again, satanic trinitarians have changed it to future tense. Then it says he will be called eternal father. Jesus is never called the father, and it is totally against their Creed that Jesus was the father. They are supposed to be separate beings, who form 1. Jesus is never referred to as the father, yet Paul followers are happy to accept this verse as a prophesy about Jesus. Then you got Isaiah 7.14, again mischievous trinitarians have mistraslated the verse to imply the virgin birth of christ. The Hebrew says "amah," meaning a young woman, but the Greek has been changed to translate as a virgin. Smh Despite the clear evidence of this falsehood, Paul followers will deny it. Sadly, one needs to remain insincere and throw logic out the window to remain on this falsehood. Sorry if this offends. Please do study, this is your salvation. Stop blaspheming our Almighty God 🙏😼
    1
  471. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  472. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”
    1
  473. Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.
    1
  474. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
    1
  475. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”,.,.
    1
  476. According to early church tradition, originating with Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60–130 AD),[10] the gospel was written by Matthew the companion of Jesus, but this presents numerous problems.[9] Most modern scholars hold that it was written anonymously[8] in the last quarter of the first century by a male Jew who stood on the margin between traditional and nontraditional Jewish values and who was familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time
    1
  477. In many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.
    1
  478.  @jeanalice4732  Not only is the great commission doctored, Matthew is written by yet another anonymous author, a ju who copied Mark
    1
  479. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia
    1
  480. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God..
    1
  481. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  482. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,.,
    1
  483. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,,.
    1
  484. What about “He who is without s77n, should k4st the f1r5t”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  485. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  486. 1 Timothy 2:8-15 ESV / 38 helpful votes I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
    1
  487. 1 Timothy 2:9 ESV / 129 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful Likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire,
    1
  488. “And I want women to be modest in their appearance. They should wear decent and appropriate clothing and not draw attention to themselves by the way they fix their hair or by wearing gold or pearls or expensive clothes. For women who claim to be devoted to God should make themselves attractive by the good things they do.” - 1 Timothy 2:9-10 NLT
    1
  489. wake up! they had to add the trinity later Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version.
    1
  490. the fa.Yke comission matt 28.19 isnt found in any manuscript befire the 3rd century. Not only did they add in that " paulanity was now to be spread to the world" they later, had to add in the trinity to this already added command Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.
    1
  491. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.” The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”
    1
  492. Bruce Metzger, the premier New Testament textual critic, writes: “Matthew and Luke suppress or weaken references in Mark to such human emotions of Jesus as grief and anger and amazement as well as Jesus’ unrequited love; they also omit Mark’s statement that Jesus’ friends thought he was beside himself”. He explains further, that: “The later gospels omit what might imply that Jesus was unable to accomplish what he willed
and also omit questions asked by Jesus which might be taken to imply his ignorance.”[3] Metzger continues further by enumerating instances where Matthew and Luke soften Mark’s statements which might minimize the majesty of Jesus and replaced it with illustrations of a more alluring and authoritative Jesus. In the story of the fig tree as found in Mark, the disciples did not notice the withering of the tree until next morning. For Matthew, this seemed less dramatic and unimpressive, and hence in his narrative the tree withered at once, leaving the disciples in shock and amazement. Matthew and Luke were adamant in changing the words of Jesus. They wanted to make Jesus say what they wanted people to believe, “reflecting a later stage of theological understanding than that in Mark.” (Metzger, pg 83) It seems quite clear that during both the pre and post gospel stages of the gospel traditions transmission, the available material was molded, filtered and changed in direct correlation to the Christological convictions of those who handled the traditions. It is important to stress that this is not a case of the evangelists’ mere differing in emphasis; rather there are numerous occasions when the later gospel writers go out of their way to modify and alter the earlier version. Therefore, if we wish to come close to the historical Jesus in the gospels, it is a good starting point to compare the stories in the various gospels, to discern where the story has altered
    1
  493. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!..
    1
  494. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. — 1 Timothy 2:12, KJV
    1
  495. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves..,
    1
  496. ​ @elebiyoraymond6091Â đŸ€Š have you heard of the kroo.sad3s. Have you heard of the m155.1l35 🌳 and blare dropped on I. Raq. They were inscribed with bible verses
    1
  497. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  498. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,...
    1
  499. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,
    1
  500. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,
    1
  501. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,...
    1
  502. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt....
    1
  503. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,,..
    1
  504. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,.,
    1
  505. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well....,
    1
  506. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,..
    1
  507. On 12 December 2021, members of Hindu right-wing groups allegedly set fire to Christian religious books in Karnataka’s Kolar district. According to a report by NDTV, this was the “38th attack on religious minorities in Karnataka in the last 12 months”. The report also said that the number of attacks on the community has increased ever since the government started considering a bill to ban forcible religious conversion.
    1
  508. On 3 October 2021, a prayer house in Roorkee was allegedly vandalised by a mob of nearly 250 people after accusing Pentecostal evangelist Prio Sadhna Potter and those present of illegal conversions.
    1
  509. The following month, members of the Bajrang Dal and the RSS allegedly vandalised a newly set up church in Delhi’s Dwarka area. The people who were participating in the Sunday prayer meeting at the Church were accused of violating the Delhi Disaster Management Act (DDMA) guidelines as the premises had not been officially registered as a religious site.
    1
  510. A year later, amidst the festivities of Christmas, a spate of attacks against Christians angered the community. They eventually staged a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar a few weeks ago, saying that, “Our people are being beaten up.”
    1
  511. The first attack among these was on December 20, 2022, when a man dressed up as Santa Claus was beaten up by a Hindutva mob in a residential colony in the Makarpura area, Vadodara in Gujarat. According to media reports, the victim, Shashikant Dabhi, dressed up as Santa Claus entered the Avdhoot society in Makarpura where Christian families were celebrating the Christmas fervor.,.,.
    1
  512. Delhi in that year saw a whole of six attacks on Churches and a Christian school - which included alleged arson attacks on churches in Rohini and Dilshad Garden along with acts of vandalism in churches in Jasola and Vikaspuri. Fast-forward a couple of years, at least 305 incidents of violence against Christians were recorded in the first nine months of 2021, according to a fact-finding report released by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, United Against Hate, and United Christian Forum. Some of these have been reported from states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.,.
    1
  513. pitted as the worst year for Indian Christians in the history of post-Independence India, according to a similar report released by the Catholic Secular Forum (CSF). The forum compiles statistics with regard to cases of religious persecution of Christians for decades. Their data shows there have been at least 365 major attacks on community members as well as institutions for practising and spreading their faith.,,.
    1
  514. The same year saw another wave of attacks directed against Christian churches and prayer halls in Karnataka by the Hindu organisation Bajrang Dal. The violence first erupted on 14 September when about 20 churches were vandalised in various districts of Karnataka including Mangalore, Udupi, and Chikkamagaluru among others. During the same attacks, several symbols of Christianity were under threat in Tamil Nadu. Three churches in Erode and Karur districts were stoned, a statue of Mother Mary in Krishnagiri was stolen and an idol of Jesus in Madurai was vandalised - all in over five days.,.,.
    1
  515.  @mumu9690  whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,
    1
  516. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  517. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  518. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    1
  519. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well
    1
  520. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13...,
    1
  521. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia
    1
  522. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,,,,
    1
  523. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was.......
    1
  524. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,......
    1
  525. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life
    1
  526. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,,,,,,
    1
  527. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,
    1
  528. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,
    1
  529. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏,,,,
    1
  530. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.....
    1
  531. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.....
    1
  532. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation......
    1
  533. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee".....
    1
  534. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history......
    1
  535. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John,,,,,
    1
  536. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God.,.
    1
  537. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š....
    1
  538.  @maryvandeusen5554  and this is precisely why 3ll was made. For people who follow their desires and ignore what our creator has told us through his prophets and his revelations. When that day comes and you see Jesus trembling in fear like all other humans, unable to help anyone, it will be too late. Hopefully you put the emotions aside and study, before it's 2 late 🙏
    1
  539. Muhammed taught anyone who harms a non combatant wont even smell paradise. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non combtnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins to be harm3d. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam. its shockin how much they make things up, but its cool. they wil need to answer for all their actions
    1
  540.  @mumu9690  whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,
    1
  541. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,
    1
  542. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    1
  543. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,
    1
  544. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,,,,
    1
  545. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  546. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    1
  547. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  548. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.
    1
  549. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,.,.
    1
  550. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,
    1
  551. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,..
    1
  552. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  553. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,........,.
    1
  554. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,,.
    1
  555. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.
    1
  556. The God of the Bible, JESUS, THEY SAY explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  557. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you
    1
  558. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  559. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  560. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱
    1
  561. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,
    1
  562. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  563. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  564. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  565. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz
    1
  566. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment
    1
  567. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  568. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  569. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  570. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  571. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  572. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  573. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  574. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  575. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶đŸ„â›Ș 🌮 are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„
    1
  576. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed.
    1
  577. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.
    1
  578. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt.
    1
  579. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe.đŸ‘¶
    1
  580. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13.
    1
  581. 17 Now therefore kw1e77 every male among the little ones, and kw137 every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. num 31
    1
  582. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  583. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  584. Muhammad's religious career is often divided into two periods: the Meccan Period which lasted for thirteen years, from the start of his revelations to his emigration to Medina; and the Medinan period, which lasted the remaining ten years of his life. The Meccan Period is characterized by the more elliptical and otherworldly portions of the Qur'an, and by the story of the rejected and persecuted prophet. Had the assassination plot against him in 621 succeeded, his religious career would have been similar in broad outline to that of Jesus. However, Muhammad escaped the trap set for him and went to live in the oasis of Medina. There he evolved from the charismatic head of a small group to the political and spiritual director of a large community. For the first time he had to wrestle with the challenges of creating a new society. The Qur'an continued to be revealed to him, but the focus of the message broadened now from the purely spiritual to include the more temporal issues of community building, lawmaking, and social institutions. Muhammad also came under formal military attack for the first time in Medina. Consequently, the Qur'an and Muhammad's teaching also focused on delineating the concept of the just war. Formal permission to fight is first applied in the Medinan Period. Muhammad: Legacy of a Prophet He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth. He preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, initiated numerous social and political reforms, established a powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and completely revolutionized the worlds of human thought and behavior for all times to come.
    1
  585. Does Islam has a code of war? Other revelations and rulings concerned the proper treatment of prisoners of war and non-combatants, the sanction against killing innocent civilians, and the respectful treatment of enemy corpses (in contrast to the custom of the time, which was mutilation.) The wanton destruction of property or agricultural resources was put off limits too. Even words of consolation for prisoners of war are found in the Qur'an: "Prophet, tell the captives you have taken: 'If God finds some good in your hearts, He will reward you with something better than was taken away from you, and forgive your sins, for God is forgiving and kind." (Qur'an 8:70)
    1
  586.  @iamanonymous7244  but you belive Jesus was stryppd. N4yk33d, wipd, yoomiliated and kweeled on a cross against his will 😆
    1
  587. ​ @iamanonymous7244  but you blieve your God Jesus was str1pp3d n33k33d, w1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and un. alibed. on a cross against his will??
    1
  588. ​ @iamanonymous7244 but you blieve your God Jesus was str1pp3d n33k33d, w1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and un. alibed. on a cross against his will?? @iamanonymous7244 
    1
  589. ​ @iamanonymous7244 but you blieve your God Jesus was str1pp3d n33k33d, w1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and un. alibed. on a cross against his will??
    1
  590.  @iamanonymous7244  âŹ‡ïžđŸ˜†đŸ˜†đŸ˜†
    1
  591. ​ @iamanonymous7244  ​ @iamanonymous7244 but you blieve your God Jesus was 5tr1pp3d. n33k. 33d, w1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and un. ali. bed. on a x against his will??
    1
  592. ​ @iamanonymous7244 ​ @iamanonymous7244 but you blieve your God Jesus was 5tr1pp3d. n33k. 33d, w1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and un. ali. bed. on a x against his will??
    1
  593. ​ @iamanonymous7244 ​ @iamanonymous7244 but you blieve your God Jesus was 5trpp3d. n33k. k34d, why1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and ung on a x against his will??
    1
  594. ​ @iamanonymous7244 ​ @iamanonymous7244 but you blieve your God Jesus was 5trpp3d. n33k. k34d, why1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and ung on a x against his will??
    1
  595.  @iamanonymous7244  ​ but you blieve your God Jesus was 5trpp3d.
    1
  596. ​ @iamanonymous7244 ​ naked
    1
  597. his clothes removed for the world to see
    1
  598. ​ @iamanonymous7244 ​ why1ppd, yoo,mill.iated and ung on a x against his will??
    1
  599.  @iamanonymous7244  ​ @iamanonymous7244 ​ @iamanonymous7244 yoo,mill.iated and ung on a x against his will??
    1
  600.  @iamanonymous7244  đŸ€ŠđŸ€ŠđŸ€Šâš°ïžđŸ€ŠđŸ€Šâš°ïžđŸ€ŠđŸ€Šâš°ïžđŸ€Ł
    1
  601.  @stellaaniston9774  that's not true at all. You described Islam. It tells you to check all the religion, before deciding.
    1
  602.  @stellaaniston9774  Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to ell
    1
  603.  @Paladin1976  try Bart erman So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  604. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  605. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  606. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  607. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  608. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  609. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,...
    1
  610. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,
    1
  611. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,
    1
  612. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.,
    1
  613. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,.,.
    1
  614. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,
    1
  615. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  616. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,..,
    1
  617. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  618. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”..
    1
  619. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,,.,.
    1
  620. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,,.,.
    1
  621. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,......,,
    1
  622. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.,
    1
  623. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,.....,
    1
  624. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,..
    1
  625. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....,.,..
    1
  626. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  627. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations...
    1
  628. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  629. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„,.,.
    1
  630. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. ,...
    1
  631. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety...
    1
  632. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt.......
    1
  633. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶..
    1
  634. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,
    1
  635. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian..../...
    1
  636. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction...,
    1
  637. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,.,
    1
  638. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,.,./.,,.
    1
  639. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12,.
    1
  640. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,
    1
  641. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later
    1
  642. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you.
    1
  643. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  644. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  645. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  646. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  647. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical.
    1
  648. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  649. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  650. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  651. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  652. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  653. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  654. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  655. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  656. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  657. There will be NO HUMILIATION when we look up the validity of the famous story of the adult eress woman, one that is the GO TO STORY pointed to, as the most beautiful of teachings of Jesus, and we realise that it is remo ved from modern translations because the story was A CONFIRMED INTER POL ATION, a froidd, AND NOT IN THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS. Even though this story, is a big part of our faith, which we use to show Jesus was all love đŸ€Š. We will not care. ( I mean the story itself contra bicted our beliefs, because we belive Jesus is si nless, and so should have st0n 3d the woman, but he didn't, meaning he was also a s1nner! But stop it. We don't use our brains and question nonsense. We says it's a mystery and blindly accept it) So what if church and Paul teach DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT. So what if Jesus refers to himself as a prophet, and is called by all those close to him! We will change the meanings of words to remain upon falsehood. GOD is now also a prophet because Jesus bought a message, and multiple ano nee mous authors 4 centuries after Jesus told us Jesus is God ( in gospel of John), and so God can also be a prophet. ( again, don't bother pointing out that if Jesus was indeed God, then that means he was D3C3IV ING THE PEOPLE, letting them believe he was a prophet when he was actually their God!, because we won't care) most of us haven't heard verses like john seven teen .3, 2wenty.7teen, unambiguous clear cut, not open to interpretation statements that clearly d35 troy our whole existence, because church pastors like to keep them quiet. So what if most of the statements we depend on, are metaphorical, and clearly refuted by verses from Jesus, so what if Jesus saying he is " Alpha and omega" is removed from modern translations because its yet another fraudlent insertion. Rev1.eleven john 5ive sev7 is one of our most famous frwdulent insertions, the trinity formula, johanine coma, it is also removed from all modern translations, because it is yet anothwer froid. Even though, all the inter pol ations, fraud and mi15 stranslations seem to be around who God is, and who Jesus is, alarm bells wont go off ringing. We will instead, insist the bible isn't kurpted. We will get angry with the Qur'an and Muslims for daring for suggesting it. Even though God says He doesn't accept human s4c rifice, we will insist Jesus the man, d13d for us. We know God is immortal, so we will reconcile by creating a second dimension of Jesus, where he is 100% man and 100% God, so we have a loophole. When muslims tell us God is immortal, and so Jesus can't be God, we will be able to say "his human nature d1 3d".... and if the Muslims say that God hay 8s uman s4c rifice, we can say "He was God in flesh" and it was a divine s4c ri fice! We appreciate when Jesus was asked the all important question about what was required for salvation, he didnt say believe i will dy for your sins, no, Jesus said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is one,...HOWEVER, we prefer the story paul and church taught us, this is much better for us as we don't have to s4c ri fice anymore, we just belive Jesus paid for our sins, and be sorry and bingo! And as you have seen so far, we aren't very s1n seer, so we see no in just iss when an innocent pays for the s1ns of the guilty, or when children inherit s1ns for krymez that had nothing to do with them. Even though this goes against all the previous messages and teachings, and original s1n is only found in pauls work and the last gospel John, we will accept this 3 vil concept. Again, we don't care that in Eze kiel 8teen .2wenty God tells us he hay 8s ORIGINAL S1N, BECAUSE HE IS JUST, and that we can be saved through repentance, not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin through his mercy, WITHOUT BLuD. ( WE COMPELTELY IGNORE THIS BECAUSE IT IS ISLAM ) ....also we can point to our false pro pet paul, who said we can do away with the old covenant. ( even though Jesus said that not one JOT shouldn't be kept until heaven and earth disappear ) they don't call us paul followers for nothing. We will insist Jesus is the only begotten son of God, even though David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. And we will say that the title 'son of man' is a divine title ( don't remind us eze keel is called son of man more times than Jesus ) We will claim Jesus was a willing s4k rifice even though Jesus begs, and cries all day to be saved from the cruc fiction. Jesus 'will' was to be saved, but he said he would accept whatever was God's will. We believe God DID NOT ANSWER Jesus prayers, and our God was stripped n4k3d, bee ten whyppd and kil d by men against his wishes. Even though all the disciples deserted Jesus, and there were no historical eyewitness, we will argue there are ( we only have jos ephus, who wasn't an eyewitness, and reported on rumours ) We will point to eye zayya 53, where Jesus meets absolutely NONE of the criteria, and ignore salm 9one where Jesus is mentioned by name, and says not even a bruise or cut would come to Jesus as God will send angels to protect him and raise him up We will ignore the letters of ignacious which writ to challenge the popular belief that the crucifixion of Jesus was an illusion. This proves in the 1st century, people were unsure if Jesus was crucified. We will insist a plural godhead of 3 fully God's is PURE MONOTHEISM. even we know its absurd, but if we keep insisting, we can be at peace with it. Our bible attributes much bad and f17th to Jesus that we wish it didn't, but we are good at spinning and miss represen tation of text, so we will twist our way out of it. Although we believe Jesus is God and always was, we will run whenever people respond to our critique of Islam, by showing 10x worse stuff our God Jesus commanded in the o.t. And for any of the bad stuff they show us from the n.t., we just say Jesus was teaching a parable 😉 always works đŸ’Ș We will continue spreading l13s about Islam, because it is the biggest thret to xtianity, many of our pristes, celebs, and in particular, our woman, are leaving paul anity for Islam by the fastest rate. The conversion rates are the highest, and most ree verts to Islam are white xtian woman! But, as malcolm once said, the media can make the innocent the gylty and the gylty the innocent, and the sion media is on our side, look at how easily we made the world believe they did nine wane wan, look how we lyde about sad damn, ga daf, luted them countries and now we are helping the sionist juws carry out a g3n 0cide on the nay tivs. ( we don't care the ones we help LITERALLY belive our God Jesus is boil ing in x crement and sea men)....
    1
  658. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  659. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian....
    1
  660. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  661. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  662. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  663. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  664. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”..
    1
  665. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13.
    1
  666. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,,,.
    1
  667. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,........
    1
  668. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,/.
    1
  669. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,....,,
    1
  670. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,..
    1
  671. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....,.,
    1
  672. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  673. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  674. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  675. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,
    1
  676. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,,.,.
    1
  677. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,.......,.,
    1
  678. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,..
    1
  679. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,....,,.
    1
  680. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,..
    1
  681. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....,.,
    1
  682. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.......
    1
  683. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  684. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  685. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  686. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  687. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  688. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  689. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  690. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  691. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  692. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  693. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  694. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  695. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  696. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  697. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  698. The Bible, unfortunately, for Christians doesn't support their false beliefs. man has attributed his writing to God.That’s why we see these errors and contradictions, insertions and revisions. To follow xtianity, you have to turn a blind eye to facts and not use logic. E.g 3 = 1. Or 100% man and 100% God. Or...hes God, but also son of God, etc Prior to the alleged crucifiction, Jesus says his work is complete, John 17.4 another evidence that he wasn't here to die for sins. Later, he begs God to take the crucifiction away from him. Matt 27.46. If that was his whole mission, he wouldn't have said his mission was complete, nor would he beg to be saved. It's a fact that Xmas and Easter celebrations are from satanic cults. Look it up. It's no coincidence that a religion that makes people worship Gods creation instead of him has celebrations derived from satanic cults. Every prophet before Jesus, and Jesus and his disciples, and every prophet after, worshipped God as 1 person. Never a trinity. only worshipped the father I haven't misrepresented what your scripture says. No matter how hard Satan has tried to corrupt it through trinitarian scribes, it's still easily dissected to show that what the church and Paul taught you ain't from Jesus. Thats why you only have ambiguous verses, such as me and the father are one ( disciples also one in same way further in same verse ), before Abraham was..mistranslation...even then how is that saying Jesus is God??? If you see me you've seen the father...another verse  Paul followers say is proof Jesus is God...but wait a minute, if that is literal, than that means Jesus is the Father..and that is not the xtian belief. They are 2 separate entities. It's obviously metaphoric if you read the context instead of cherry-picking. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Jesus was given authority and glory...GIVEN...God is authority. Again, how at all does this show Jesus is God? Also, Jesus says he gives this very glory to the believers. Every verse you use as evidence Jesus is God is a desperate reach, its easily debunked by the bible itself. Just mistranslstions, and interpolation and fraud. why turn a blind eye to the clear-cut unambiguous statements of Jesus proving he is not God. It defies belief. E.g  I was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD.. John 17.3 and Jesus Christ whom you sent. I go to my father AND YOUR FATHER, my God and your God... John 20.17. Jesus is a mediator between God and man. The list is endless. See other comments. You would expect trinitarianism to be all over the bible. If this was the most important message, for our salvation, why is it not there in the NT? You have one interpolation about Trinity but not in manuscripts and a confirmed interpolation and so removed by most Bibles. Then you turn to Paul's statements, a man who never met Jesus and preached opposite what Jesus preached!! Still, you remain ignorant? That is why you're considered followers of Paul and not Jesus. Then you say look at the prophesies in the OT. When we look at these prophesies we find again, verses have been changed and mistranslated to inject your falsehood. And even then, it falls apart under the smallest scrutiny. E.g. Isaiah 53.5, which is about the babylonian exile of joos, trinitarians have changed it to make out its Jesus, FACTS, ask the Jews about this verse from their book. Isaiah 9.6. The Hebrew verbs are in past tense, but again, satanic trinitarians have changed it to future tense. Then it says he will be called eternal father. Jesus is never called the father, and it is totally against their Creed that Jesus was the father. They are supposed to be separate beings, who form 1. Jesus is never referred to as the father, yet Paul followers are happy to accept this verse as a prophesy about Jesus. Then you got Isaiah 7.14, again mischievous trinitarians have mistraslated the verse to imply the virgin birth of christ. The Hebrew says "amah," meaning a young woman, but the Greek has been changed to translate as a virgin. Smh Despite the clear evidence of this falsehood, Paul followers will deny it. Sadly, one needs to remain insincere and throw logic out the window to remain on this falsehood. Sorry if this offends. Please do study, this is your salvation. Stop blaspheming our Almighty God 🙏
    1
  699.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  they never quote Jesus. And when they do its metaphors, it's dee. Bunked by more verses from Jesus. Look how many times you had to say it "meant" Reading divinity into things rather than taking the clear cut unambiguous statements of Jesus
    1
  700.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  also Jesus was never called Emmanuel in his life. And Jesus never said he forgave their s7ns, he said s7ns are forgiven Muhammad also told ppl their sins were forgive. These prophets could do that because they knew what was required to be saved. Also there are other people who forgive s77ns in the Bible. Your arguments have no weight, go and study
    1
  701.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  702. Not only is the great commission doctored, Matthew is written by yet another anonymous author, a ju who copied Mark
    1
  703. According to early church tradition, originating with Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60–130 AD),[10] the gospel was written by Matthew the companion of Jesus, but this presents numerous problems.[9] Most modern scholars hold that it was written anonymously[8] in the last quarter of the first century by a male Jew who stood on the margin between traditional and nontraditional Jewish values and who was familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time
    1
  704. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”
    1
  705. Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.
    1
  706. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
    1
  707. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”
    1
  708. In many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.
    1
  709.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  Jesus refutes them. He says ...you are called GODS in scripture. I only say son of God. I can't see the replies here. So I have replied on your short on your page
    1
  710.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  John 1.1. Was copied from philo, a Greek philosopher, he was the first to say these lines. The anonymous authors of John just took it and added it to their book of rumours, also this doesn't mention Jesus name, nor is the Holy spirit included here. So to call it a clear evidence is pitiful. It doesn't get clearer than John 17.3 Jesus praying to the father, says the Father is the only true God
    1
  711.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  712.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  niv has removed the word begotten from John's...the only begotten son.. Cos it was incorrectly trains. Late. Ted. John 1.1. Is taken from Greek philosopher philo. The author took it from philo. He was the first to say it.
    1
  713.  @crysoldier-cu5gy  For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  714. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  715. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  716. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  717. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  718. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,
    1
  719. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,
    1
  720. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,....
    1
  721. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.,.,.,
    1
  722. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,....
    1
  723. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,
    1
  724. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well....
    1
  725. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  726. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. — 1 Timothy 2:12, KJV
    1
  727. 1 Timothy 2:8-15 ESV / 38 helpful votes I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling; likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire, but with what is proper for women who profess godliness—with good works. Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.
    1
  728. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!..
    1
  729. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  730. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  731. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king.
    1
  732. wake up! they had to add the trinity later Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version.
    1
  733. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”, matt 28
    1
  734. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  735. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  736. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  737. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  738. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,...
    1
  739. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,
    1
  740. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,
    1
  741. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,...
    1
  742. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt....
    1
  743. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,...
    1
  744. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,.,.
    1
  745. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  746. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,
    1
  747. There will be NO HUMILIATION when we look up the validity of the famous story of the adult eress woman, one that is the GO TO STORY pointed to, as the most beautiful of teachings of Jesus, and we realise that it is remo ved from modern translations because the story was A CONFIRMED INTER POL ATION, a froidd, AND NOT IN THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS. Even though this story, is a big part of our faith, which we use to show Jesus was all love đŸ€Š. We will not care. ( I mean the story itself contra bicted our beliefs, because we belive Jesus is si nless, and so should have st0n 3d the woman, but he didn't, meaning he was also a s1nner! But stop it. We don't use our brains and question nonsense. We says it's a mystery and blindly accept it) So what if church and Paul teach DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT. So what if Jesus refers to himself as a prophet, and is called by all those close to him! We will change the meanings of words to remain upon falsehood. GOD is now also a prophet because Jesus bought a message, and multiple ano nee mous authors 4 centuries after Jesus told us Jesus is God ( in gospel of John), and so God can also be a prophet. ( again, don't bother pointing out that if Jesus was indeed God, then that means he was D3C3IV ING THE PEOPLE, letting them believe he was a prophet when he was actually their God!, because we won't care) most of us haven't heard verses like john seven teen .3, 2wenty.7teen, unambiguous clear cut, not open to interpretation statements that clearly d35 troy our whole existence, because church pastors like to keep them quiet. So what if most of the statements we depend on, are metaphorical, and clearly refuted by verses from Jesus, so what if Jesus saying he is " Alpha and omega" is removed from modern translations because its yet another fraudlent insertion. Rev1.eleven john 5ive sev7 is one of our most famous frwdulent insertions, the trinity formula, johanine coma, it is also removed from all modern translations, because it is yet anothwer froid. Even though, all the inter pol ations, fraud and mi15 stranslations seem to be around who God is, and who Jesus is, alarm bells wont go off ringing. We will instead, insist the bible isn't kurpted. We will get angry with the Qur'an and Muslims for daring for suggesting it. Even though God says He doesn't accept human s4c rifice, we will insist Jesus the man, d13d for us. We know God is immortal, so we will reconcile by creating a second dimension of Jesus, where he is 100% man and 100% God, so we have a loophole. When muslims tell us God is immortal, and so Jesus can't be God, we will be able to say "his human nature d1 3d".... and if the Muslims say that God hay 8s uman s4c rifice, we can say "He was God in flesh" and it was a divine s4c ri fice! We appreciate when Jesus was asked the all important question about what was required for salvation, he didnt say believe i will dy for your sins, no, Jesus said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is one,...HOWEVER, we prefer the story paul and church taught us, this is much better for us as we don't have to s4c ri fice anymore, we just belive Jesus paid for our sins, and be sorry and bingo! And as you have seen so far, we aren't very s1n seer, so we see no in just iss when an innocent pays for the s1ns of the guilty, or when children inherit s1ns for krymez that had nothing to do with them. Even though this goes against all the previous messages and teachings, and original s1n is only found in pauls work and the last gospel John, we will accept this 3 vil concept. Again, we don't care that in Eze kiel 8teen .2wenty God tells us he hay 8s ORIGINAL S1N, BECAUSE HE IS JUST, and that we can be saved through repentance, not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin through his mercy, WITHOUT BLuD. ( WE COMPELTELY IGNORE THIS BECAUSE IT IS ISLAM ) ....also we can point to our false pro pet paul, who said we can do away with the old covenant. ( even though Jesus said that not one JOT shouldn't be kept until heaven and earth disappear ) they don't call us paul followers for nothing. We will insist Jesus is the only begotten son of God, even though David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. And we will say that the title 'son of man' is a divine title ( don't remind us eze keel is called son of man more times than Jesus ) We will claim Jesus was a willing s4k rifice even though Jesus begs, and cries all day to be saved from the cruc fiction. Jesus 'will' was to be saved, but he said he would accept whatever was God's will. We believe God DID NOT ANSWER Jesus prayers, and our God was stripped n4k3d, bee ten whyppd and kil d by men against his wishes. Even though all the disciples deserted Jesus, and there were no historical eyewitness, we will argue there are ( we only have jos ephus, who wasn't an eyewitness, and reported on rumours ) We will point to eye zayya 53, where Jesus meets absolutely NONE of the criteria, and ignore salm 9one where Jesus is mentioned by name, and says not even a bruise or cut would come to Jesus as God will send angels to protect him and raise him up We will ignore the letters of ignacious which writ to challenge the popular belief that the crucifixion of Jesus was an illusion. This proves in the 1st century, people were unsure if Jesus was crucified. We will insist a plural godhead of 3 fully God's is PURE MONOTHEISM. even we know its absurd, but if we keep insisting, we can be at peace with it. Our bible attributes much bad and f17th to Jesus that we wish it didn't, but we are good at spinning and miss represen tation of text, so we will twist our way out of it. Although we believe Jesus is God and always was, we will run whenever people respond to our critique of Islam, by showing 10x worse stuff our God Jesus commanded in the o.t. And for any of the bad stuff they show us from the n.t., we just say Jesus was teaching a parable 😉 always works đŸ’Ș We will continue spreading l13s about Islam, because it is the biggest thret to xtianity, many of our pristes, celebs, and in particular, our woman, are leaving paul anity for Islam by the fastest rate. The conversion rates are the highest, and most ree verts to Islam are white xtian woman! But, as malcolm once said, the media can make the innocent the gylty and the gylty the innocent, and the sion media is on our side, look at how easily we made the world believe they did nine wane wan, look how we lyde about sad damn, ga daf, luted them countries and now we are helping the sionist juws carry out a g3n 0cide on the nay tivs. ( we don't care the ones we help LITERALLY belive our God Jesus is boil ing in x crement and sea men)....
    1
  748. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian
    1
  749. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  750. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„
    1
  751. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed.
    1
  752. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.
    1
  753. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt.
    1
  754. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  755. 17 Now therefore kw1e77 every male among the little ones, and kw137 every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. num 31
    1
  756. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  757. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..
    1
  758. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  759. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  760.  @virginiashirley4139  cool story but the truth don't agree with you. See above
    1
  761. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  762. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  763.  @rwibutsoyvestvofficial6365  Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian
    1
  764.  @rwibutsoyvestvofficial6365  They say Jesus was always God. And then you show them the n.t they ignore. You show them o.t. they claim that God wasn't Jesus. What more can you expect from ppl who claim to love Jesus yet follow Paul instead...
    1
  765.  @rwibutsoyvestvofficial6365  but wasnt Jesus ALWAYS God?
    1
  766.  @rwibutsoyvestvofficial6365  You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  767.  @rwibutsoyvestvofficial6365  but you lot don't follow the n.t. anyway..
    1
  768. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you
    1
  769. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.
    1
  770. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  771. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  772. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,
    1
  773. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  774. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,,,
    1
  775. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..
    1
  776. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  777. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  778. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  779. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  780. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  781. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  782. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  783. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  784. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  785. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,..
    1
  786. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,
    1
  787. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.
    1
  788. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  789. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  790. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,
    1
  791. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  792. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.
    1
  793. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....
    1
  794. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12....
    1
  795. The God of the Bible, JESUS, THEY SAY explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  796. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.
    1
  797. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  798. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....
    1
  799. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  800. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  801. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.
    1
  802. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  803. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you
    1
  804. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  805. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  806. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  807. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.
    1
  808. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,
    1
  809. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt.
    1
  810. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  811. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment
    1
  812. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  813. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  814. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  815. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  816. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  817.  @piotrkulpa8034  that won't help you on that day, when you see Jesus trembling in fear like all other humans, unable to help anyone.
    1
  818. On 12 December 2021, members of Hindu right-wing groups allegedly set fire to Christian religious books in Karnataka’s Kolar district. According to a report by NDTV, this was the “38th attack on religious minorities in Karnataka in the last 12 months”. The report also said that the number of attacks on the community has increased ever since the government started considering a bill to ban forcible religious conversion...
    1
  819. On 3 October 2021, a prayer house in Roorkee was allegedly vandalised by a mob of nearly 250 people after accusing Pentecostal evangelist Prio Sadhna Potter and those present of illegal conversions.
    1
  820. The following month, members of the Bajrang Dal and the RSS allegedly vandalised a newly set up church in Delhi’s Dwarka area. The people who were participating in the Sunday prayer meeting at the Church were accused of violating the Delhi Disaster Management Act (DDMA) guidelines as the premises had not been officially registered as a religious site.
    1
  821. A year later, amidst the festivities of Christmas, a spate of attacks against Christians angered the community. They eventually staged a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar a few weeks ago, saying that, “Our people are being beaten up.”
    1
  822. The first attack among these was on December 20, 2022, when a man dressed up as Santa Claus was beaten up by a Hindutva mob in a residential colony in the Makarpura area, Vadodara in Gujarat. According to media reports, the victim, Shashikant Dabhi, dressed up as Santa Claus entered the Avdhoot society in Makarpura where Christian families were celebrating the Christmas fervor.,.,.
    1
  823. Delhi in that year saw a whole of six attacks on Churches and a Christian school - which included alleged arson attacks on churches in Rohini and Dilshad Garden along with acts of vandalism in churches in Jasola and Vikaspuri.
    1
  824. Fast-forward a couple of years, at least 305 incidents of violence against Christians were recorded in the first nine months of 2021, according to a fact-finding report released by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, United Against Hate, and United Christian Forum. Some of these have been reported from states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.,.
    1
  825. pitted as the worst year for Indian Christians in the history of post-Independence India, according to a similar report released by the Catholic Secular Forum (CSF). The forum compiles statistics with regard to cases of religious persecution of Christians for decades. Their data shows there have been at least 365 major attacks on community members as well as institutions for practising and spreading their faith.,,.
    1
  826. The same year saw another wave of attacks directed against Christian churches and prayer halls in Karnataka by the Hindu organisation Bajrang Dal. The violence first erupted on 14 September when about 20 churches were vandalised in various districts of Karnataka including Mangalore, Udupi, and Chikkamagaluru among others. During the same attacks, several symbols of Christianity were under threat in Tamil Nadu. Three churches in Erode and Karur districts were stoned, a statue of Mother Mary in Krishnagiri was stolen and an idol of Jesus in Madurai was vandalised - all in over five days.,.,.
    1
  827. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  828. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,,,
    1
  829. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,
    1
  830. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  831. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessaloni
    1
  832. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,
    1
  833. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,
    1
  834. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.
    1
  835. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  836. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....
    1
  837. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,,
    1
  838. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves..,
    1
  839. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  840. What about “He who is without s77n, should k4st the f1r5t”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  841. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  842. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š,,,,
    1
  843. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,.
    1
  844. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,
    1
  845. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,,,,
    1
  846. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt
    1
  847. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz...,
    1
  848. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.,,,,,
    1
  849. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation....
    1
  850. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,,
    1
  851. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏,,,,,
    1
  852. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"...
    1
  853. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.,,,,
    1
  854. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John,,,,,
    1
  855. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  856. Around 35 CE, a man named Saul of Tarsus came; he later changed his name to Paul. Paul was a Roman citizen, a Jew, and the enemy of Jesus Christ. He was a zealous persecutor and killer of Jesus Christ’s faithful followers. En route from Jerusalem to Damascus, Paul claimed that he saw “the light” when he saw Jesus Christ appearing to him, filled with the Holy Spirit. He was chosen and commanded to teach and preach acts that Jesus Christ never did to the masses. Paul taught concepts contradictory to what Jesus Christ and faithful followers of Jesus Christ were teaching. Paul provided no proof as to what he claimed to receive. I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. (Galatians 1:11–12)
    1
  857. While Jesus Christ is the central focus of Christianity, the founder of modern Christianity is not Jesus Christ; instead, it is Paul because the version of Christianity that has survived is not the version that Jesus Christ preached; instead, it was the version that Paul preached when he claimed Jesus Christ came to him in a vision and told him to preach new concepts. He converted to Christianity and wrongfully began calling people to worship Jesus Christ and spread strange teachings. Due to his power, wealth, and relationships, people started to adopt these strange beliefs and teachings, while the true disciples of Jesus Christ disapproved.
    1
  858. The disciples clashed and argued with Paul because of his innovative and bizarre teachings, and the New Testament references this fact. Many Christians mistakenly took him as one of the disciples of Jesus Christ due to his claim that he was, but he was not, nor did he ever meet Jesus Christ. While some Christians elevate Paul to sainthood, Paul was responsible for destroying the teachings of Jesus Christ. He told people they did not need to follow God’s laws, even though Jesus Christ suffered and struggled to convey the Message of God, which included teaching people to obey God’s commandments.
    1
  859. Many people took Paul’s word and believed him, even though Jesus Christ never violated the Laws of Moses that came before him, and even though the Bible clearly states, Till Heaven and earth pass, the one that breaks the Law will be called the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished’ ‘Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.’ (Matthew 5:18–19). This verse explicitly states that anyone that breaks the Law or teaches others to break the Law will be called the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven. On the contrary, the verse states that whoever practices and teaches the Law will be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
    1
  860. Almost all the concepts of the modern-day teachings of Christianity, including the concept of Jesus Christ being the son of God and Atonement, are from Paul — and not from the teachings of Jesus Christ. As such, the teachings of Paul contradict the teachings of Jesus.Paul met the disciples of Christ occasionally but was not fortunate enough to live in their company. When he later came into the picture after the departure of Jesus Christ, he made some severe changes to the religion to win over the Gentiles (non-Jewish people). He introduced what became vital concepts of Christianity, including the idea that Christ is the Son of God, that he sacrificed himself on the cross to save humanity, and that all one needs to do to earn Paradise is to believe Christ died for his sins. Half of the New Testament is written by this man who never met Jesus Christ in his lifetime. Yet, Christians do not question the authenticity of this ex-enemy of Jesus Christ and thus take his word as Truth.
    1
  861. The Book of Acts in the Bible holds three contradictory accounts of Paul’s so-called “conversion” when he claims he saw Jesus Christ in a vision. The story has many holes. Acts 9:7 states: The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. This verse states that the men traveling with Saul stood speechless, for they heard the voice but could not see, but in Acts 22:9, there exists an apparent contradiction. The verse states the men travailing with Paul saw the light but did not hear the voice who spoke! And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. Did the men that traveled with Paul see the light or hear the voice? Why don’t we have records of these witnesses to testify to this significant event? The answer is simple; this event never happened.
    1
  862. The New Testament that is now in existence contains more writings of Paul than any other source. All his reports were written before the four Gospels. They are influenced mainly by the teachings and innovations of Paul, even though his writings consist of hundreds of inconsistences and contradictions! Paul abolished God’s laws, such as not eating pork, fasting, observing the Sabbath, and the instruction of circumcision.
    1
  863. The early devoted followers of Jesus Christ struggled for years to uphold the teaching that only One God (the Father) should be worshiped, and Jesus Christ was only His human Messenger. The real followers of Jesus Christ opposed the blatant misrepresentations that Paul was wrongfully decimating. They had a strong understanding of his message and tried to maintain the purity and clarity of his teachings — worshipping God the Father alone and following His commandments.
    1
  864. However, Paul gave Jesus Christ’s faithful disciples a bad reputation. Paul gave these faithful disciples, who were with Jesus Christ all along — supporting and helping him, the reputation of being lazy, misguided, and hypocritical. People mistakenly believed that Paul understood the message and teachings of Jesus Christ better than the disciples, even though they lived with Jesus Christ and Paul had never met him. How bizarre is that?
    1
  865. Since the innovative teachings of Paul appealed to the Gentiles (non-Jewish people), Jesus’ faithful followers were unable to stop Paul’s misguidance. Although the first Christians were Unitarians who asserted the unity of God and would have rejected the doctrine of the Trinity, Jesus Christ’s message of the absolute Oneness of God lasted in its original purity for only a short time, then diminished over the years. The very first Christians were not Trinitarians and, in fact, never had heard of the Trinity, as many current-day Biblical scholars acknowledge.
    1
  866. Some Christians developed different beliefs about the Prophet Jesus PBUH over the next few centuries. They claimed that he was divine, calling him the Son of God, which eventually became the dominant Christian belief. Sadly, Christian leaders took Paul’s beliefs as their religion even though his teachings contradict the Bible, and Christian leaders abandoned the actual teachings of Jesus Christ. Many Biblical scholars recognize and admit that the formulation of modern Christianity did not begin with Jesus Christ; instead, the faith started with Paul, as shocking as that sounds. Sadly, Paul, not Jesus Christ, is the true founder of modern Christianity. Today, only Muslims follow the actual teachings of Jesus Chris
    1
  867.  @joemarucci3917  Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow.
    1
  868.  @joemarucci3917  and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to.
    1
  869. But those Fren3mies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and ** them in front of me. luke
    1
  870.  @baronjay8017  But those Fren3mies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and ** them in front of me.
    1
  871. Try luuk33. 9teen. Twenty. Seben
    1
  872. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  873. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you.
    1
  874. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he wa
    1
  875. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  876. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  877. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  878. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.
    1
  879. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical.
    1
  880. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  881. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  882. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  883. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  884. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  885. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  886. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  887. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  888. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....
    1
  889. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  890. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,..,.,,,
    1
  891. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  892. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  893.  @valerianaerospace3268  Hitler was a Paul follower. The graves were adorned with crosses. Look it up. They r facts
    1
  894. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  895. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  896. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚đŸ™…â€â™€đŸŽâ›Ș🌮 are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„
    1
  897. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed.
    1
  898. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.
    1
  899. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt.
    1
  900. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  901. Critics as usual apply ‘cut and choose’ approach with regards to this passage (Quran 2:191). They only quote, “And ciw them wherever you find them
(2:191). However, when we read the passage in its context (2:190-195) it says opposite what they portray of the verse. Quran 2:190 – 195 2:190 Fight in the way of God those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. God does not like transgressors. 2:191 And ciw them wherever you find them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah [Persecution] is worse than kiwing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kiw them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. 2:192 And if they cease, then indeed, God is Forgiving and Merciful. 2:193 Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah [Persecution] and [until] worship is for God. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors. 2:194 [Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear God and know that God is with those who fear Him. 2:195 And spend in the way of God and do not throw [yourselves] with your [own] hands into destruction [by refraining]. And do good; indeed, God loves the doers of good. It’s important whenever one reads a Quranic verse, to read it in its context. As you have read, critics only quote the part which suites them, they isolate previous verses and the ones after. When the passage is examined in context, it is clear that nowhere does it sanction the kiwing of innocent people. From verse 2:190 to 2:195, when read, Allah makes it evident to fight those only who fight them, fighting in self-defence. Another thing some love to do with the verse is, change the Arabic word’s meaning. Example, the Arabic word ‘Fitna’ used in 2:191 and 2:193, they deceptively have translated the word as ‘disbelief’. So, when it’s read in that perspective, the passage is implying to fight to those who are disbelievers, just because of their religion. This again when we examine it, it will turn out to be a lie. The Arabic word ‘Fitnah’ means ‘persecution’, ‘corruption’, ‘sedition’. But when the word ‘Fitnah’ is used in verse 2:191 and 2:193 it means ‘persecution’
    1
  902. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..
    1
  903. 17 Now therefore kw1e77 every male among the little ones, and kw137 every woman that hath known man by lying with him. 18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. num 31
    1
  904. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  905. Clearly just a kid with mental issues. But as we know too well, shayy tann uses these publications and xtian and ch3wz to D. Mon. I. Ze. The one true religion of God.
    1
  906. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,.....
    1
  907. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  908. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,
    1
  909. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.
    1
  910. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,....
    1
  911. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  912. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,...
    1
  913. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,,
    1
  914. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  915. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  916. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  917. i am đŸ˜†đŸ˜…đŸ€ŁđŸ˜‚ we dont need to twist. we quote verbatim, and it shows you paul followers r only folowin shay. tann Jesus said the father is the only true God, and to know God, and the prophet Jesus was the way to salvation for the lost sheep of Israel, who Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY FOR. and this is why so many paul followers women and prists are leaving this paid. gan religion and coming back to Islam. the only religion God gave us from Adam, thru Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed ( pbut all) the more you ppl make things up about it, the mor go and study, and when a s7ns33r heart leanrs the truth, they accept.
    1
  918. nearly all of it was from the n.t. but they either ignore it, or say its a parable. at the same time, they say Jesus was ALWAYS GOD, and when you show them the o.t. they claim that wasnt from Jesus. they say Jesus is the son of God, but also the Father. they say Jesus is the only begotten son of God, but God in their bible calls David his begotten son. the reason yall r miss. guy. dd is cos u dont deserv the truth. They claim a plural godhead made of multiple 100% distinct God's is PURE MONOTHEISM đŸ€Ł đŸ€Š the God of Abraham they say
    1
  919. and this is why so many paul followers women and prists are leaving this paid. gan religion and coming back to Islam. the only religion God gave us from Adam, thru Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed ( pbut all) the more you ppl make things up about it, the mor go and study, and when a s7ns33r heart leanrs the truth, they accept.
    1
  920. we quote verbatim, we dont need to make anythin up cos Jesus in the bible denies them. leaving them grasping at "i am" 😄 Jesus said the father is the only true God, and to know God, and the prophet Jesus was the way to salvation for the lost sheep of Israel, who Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY FOR.
    1
  921. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,..
    1
  922. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  923. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,......
    1
  924. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,..,,.
    1
  925. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.
    1
  926. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,..,
    1
  927. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt...,,,
    1
  928. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,
    1
  929. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  930. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,
    1
  931. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations
    1
  932. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.,,
    1
  933. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God,,.
    1
  934. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!,,
    1
  935. Christian ministers, the ones with oly spirit, are knwon for gruu mhing 8oys Muhammed was in an arranged marriage, not lu57in,,
    1
  936. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame,.
    1
  937. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,..
    1
  938. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  939. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,......
    1
  940. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  941. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian....
    1
  942. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  943. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  944. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,..,
    1
  945. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,..
    1
  946. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.
    1
  947. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.
    1
  948. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  949. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,,
    1
  950. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,,
    1
  951. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.,
    1
  952. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  953. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.
    1
  954. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. ,.
    1
  955. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety....
    1
  956. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt.......
    1
  957. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶...
    1
  958. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,,,
    1
  959. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian.......
    1
  960. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction....
    1
  961. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....,.,.
    1
  962. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,..
    1
  963. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,,,
    1
  964. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  965. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  966. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,..........
    1
  967. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  968. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.
    1
  969. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  970. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.❀
    1
  971. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,🎉
    1
  972. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,❀
    1
  973. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,😼
    1
  974. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏😼
    1
  975. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.😼🎉
    1
  976. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.😼
    1
  977. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  978. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"😼
    1
  979. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.🎉
    1
  980. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John🎉😱
    1
  981. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  982.  @verityhunt2913  there are plenty of good people in evey group of ppl, However, this man will lead many to the đŸ”„ as he is not spreadin the message of Jesus, which was Islam. He is spreading the tale from Paul and church
    1
  983.  @verityhunt2913  why r u so worried about the truth? I have quoted the bible verbatim, not out of context, and where the context wasn't provided, context doesn't change anything about the quote. Anyone can verify nothing was made up.
    1
  984.  @verityhunt2913  Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian
    1
  985. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  986.  @Niday249  everything was backed with the bible. You r just projectin. You follow Paul, who is the founder of xtianity. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws.
    1
  987.  @Niday249  please name one lie or one thing I twisted... Don't make an excuse why you won't. If you make accusations and you r a good person you shud back it up People need to wake up and realise they r followin shayyy. Tannn Anyone can verify all the comms, and they will see for themselves that everything was s7nseer and true
    1
  988. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  989. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12
    1
  990. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia
    1
  991. 👉 Jesus: I didn't come to a80..7ish the Laws! (Matt 5.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No, you came to a8.o071sh it all! The law brings r4.th, and where there is no law, there is no trniz. Gr3sion! This is what Paul said! 👉 Jesus: If you love me keep my commandments! (John 14.15) đŸ€Š The Church: No, don't listen to him Christians! If you love him then keep the Church Commandments built by Paul, the early Christian purs3. Cute. T0.r! 👉 Jesus: I never ate p0.k and so you should as God Commanded! (John 7.19) đŸ€Š The Church: No! p0.k is good! 👉 Jesus: I've finished all the work that God gave me before my departure! (John 17.4) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You waited till you ascend to heaven and came in a dream to an early Christian purs3. Kut3. T0r to negate everything you've preached for 33 years!
    1
  992. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.” Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church
    1
  993. wake up! they had to add the trinity later Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version...,,.,
    1
  994.  @Chartail1  😆😆😆 It was made up. Just like the trinity. Wake up Paul followers, you will have no excuse. Don't let your 3.e G0.s take you away from salvation 🙏
    1
  995. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus : You have the same father(Creator in Bible lingo) and God as me. Same relation, i'm not literally begotten. (John 20.17 also Psalm 2.7 where David is begotten) đŸ€Š The Church: No! you are the ONLY begotten son of God (NIV has removed the word begotten from John 3.16 as they confirm it wasnt right) 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus : You have the same father(Creator in Bible lingo) and God as me. Same relation, I'm not unique in that sense. (John 20.17 also Psalm 2.7 where David is begotten) đŸ€Š The Church: No! you are the ONLY begotten son of God (NIV has removed the word begotten from John kjv as they confirm it wasnt correct previously) 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world! 👉 Jesus : sir. Kmcise male children as God Commanded! (Luke 2.21) đŸ€Š The Church: No! Sir. Kumci.sion is unnecessary and will profit us nothing. This is what Paul said, the one you came to in a dream!..
    1
  996. Deut 20ten) As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in 4ced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kcil every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plnder. You may enjoy the spoils of your 3nmies that the LORD your God has given you. What kind of God/Jesus approves of this?,,.,.
    1
  997. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  998.  @ThOi0419  evey genuine practice, they said was in response to the xtian western foregn policy, that un alibd their ppl. facts.
    1
  999. ​ @ThOi0419  9eleben was 1n5d3 jo, xtian masterplan to l00.t the riches from the mid.e
    1
  1000. for all of the g3nu1n3 acts,reason they gave was it was in response to x. tian/ch33w policy vs their ppl nowt to do wit relig
    1
  1001. The truth is its all bwash by the mead. Iya to take ppl away from the only truth
    1
  1002. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was...
    1
  1003. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later
    1
  1004. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  1005. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  1006. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1007. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱
    1
  1008. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  1009. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical.
    1
  1010. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,
    1
  1011. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  1012. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz
    1
  1013. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment
    1
  1014. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusatio
    1
  1015. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee
    1
  1016. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  1017. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  1018.  @ThOi0419  the reality is ppl r jus bein washed.brain. by shayyy. Tann. To keep them from truth
    1
  1019. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.,.,.
    1
  1020.  @Mc12Demonkiller  What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.,.,.
    1
  1021. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia
    1
  1022. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..
    1
  1023. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,
    1
  1024. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,.,
    1
  1025. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,..
    1
  1026. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,.,,
    1
  1027. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,,,
    1
  1028. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.
    1
  1029. The God of the Bible, JESUS, THEY SAY explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  1030. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....
    1
  1031. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,,
    1
  1032. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,
    1
  1033. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  1034. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  1035. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  1036. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..❀
    1
  1037. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was😼
    1
  1038. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  1039. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,😼
    1
  1040. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.❀
    1
  1041. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,😱
    1
  1042. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  1043. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  1044. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  1045. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.😼
    1
  1046. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  1047. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  1048. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"❀
    1
  1049. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  1050. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John❀
    1
  1051. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1052. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  1053. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  1054. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  1055. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  1056. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  1057. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,
    1
  1058. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  1059. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  1060. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  1061. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  1062. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  1063. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  1064. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  1065. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.
    1
  1066. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.
    1
  1067. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  1068. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  1069. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  1070. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  1071. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,...,
    1
  1072. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,..
    1
  1073. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,..
    1
  1074. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt...,.,.
    1
  1075. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....,,
    1
  1076. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.......
    1
  1077. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,
    1
  1078. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  1079. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible....
    1
  1080. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God,,
    1
  1081. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!,,,
    1
  1082. Christian ministers, the ones with oly spirit, are knwon for gruu mhing 8oys Muhammed was in an arranged marriage, not lu57in,,
    1
  1083. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame,,,,,
    1
  1084. in this technological era, its game over for them, as people can actually find out the truth and when good ppl hear the truth, it cannot be denied, and thats why all their woman and prists r leaving paulanity for Islam.,,
    1
  1085. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  1086. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  1087. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...
    1
  1088. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,,.,.
    1
  1089. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,......,,
    1
  1090. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  1091. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,......
    1
  1092. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,..
    1
  1093. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....,.,
    1
  1094. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  1095. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,..,
    1
  1096. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,,
    1
  1097. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,..
    1
  1098. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,.
    1
  1099. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt....
    1
  1100. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,...
    1
  1101. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,,
    1
  1102. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  1103. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,
    1
  1104. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.,.
    1
  1105. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,,
    1
  1106. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,..
    1
  1107. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,..,.
    1
  1108. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,,
    1
  1109. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,
    1
  1110. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,,.,
    1
  1111. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,.,
    1
  1112. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  1113. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,...
    1
  1114. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was,,.
    1
  1115. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,..
    1
  1116. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,,
    1
  1117. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱
    1
  1118. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  1119. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,
    1
  1120. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  1121. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,.
    1
  1122. On 3 October 2021, a prayer house in Roorkee was allegedly vandalised by a mob of nearly 250 people after accusing Pentecostal evangelist Prio Sadhna Potter and those present of illegal conversions.
    1
  1123. The following month, members of the Bajrang Dal and the RSS allegedly vandalised a newly set up church in Delhi’s Dwarka area. The people who were participating in the Sunday prayer meeting at the Church were accused of violating the Delhi Disaster Management Act (DDMA) guidelines as the premises had not been officially registered as a religious site. A year later, amidst the festivities of Christmas, a spate of attacks against Christians angered the community. They eventually staged a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar a few weeks ago, saying that, “Our people are being beaten up.”
    1
  1124. The first attack among these was on December 20, 2022, when a man dressed up as Santa Claus was beaten up by a Hindutva mob in a residential colony in the Makarpura area, Vadodara in Gujarat. According to media reports, the victim, Shashikant Dabhi, dressed up as Santa Claus entered the Avdhoot society in Makarpura where Christian families were celebrating the Christmas fervor.,.,.
    1
  1125. Delhi in that year saw a whole of six attacks on Churches and a Christian school - which included alleged arson attacks on churches in Rohini and Dilshad Garden along with acts of vandalism in churches in Jasola and Vikaspuri. Fast-forward a couple of years, at least 305 incidents of violence against Christians were recorded in the first nine months of 2021, according to a fact-finding report released by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, United Against Hate, and United Christian Forum. Some of these have been reported from states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.,.
    1
  1126. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,.,
    1
  1127. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,,
    1
  1128. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  1129. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,......
    1
  1130. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well....
    1
  1131. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.
    1
  1132. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.
    1
  1133. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,......
    1
  1134. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.,,,
    1
  1135. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,...
    1
  1136. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,
    1
  1137. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  1138. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  1139. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......
    1
  1140. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.......
    1
  1141. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,....
    1
  1142. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. ..
    1
  1143. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.,,,.
    1
  1144. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!
    1
  1145. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God...
    1
  1146. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame..
    1
  1147. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  1148. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,,,
    1
  1149. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian....
    1
  1150. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction.,.,.
    1
  1151. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  1152. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  1153. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,..,
    1
  1154. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,.,.
    1
  1155. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,
    1
  1156. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,.,
    1
  1157. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  1158. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,,..,
    1
  1159. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,....
    1
  1160. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well....
    1
  1161. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,,,
    1
  1162. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,...
    1
  1163. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,
    1
  1164. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,
    1
  1165. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  1166. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....,,,
    1
  1167. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,...
    1
  1168. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,
    1
  1169. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  1170. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.,,,
    1
  1171. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God,.,
    1
  1172. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!...
    1
  1173. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame,,,
    1
  1174. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was😼😼
    1
  1175. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,🎉🎉
    1
  1176. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..❀
    1
  1177. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€ŠđŸŽ‰
    1
  1178. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.😱
    1
  1179. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  1180. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,😱
    1
  1181. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.😼😅
    1
  1182. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,🎉🎉
    1
  1183. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  1184. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏😱
    1
  1185. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,🎉🎉
    1
  1186. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.😅
    1
  1187. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.🎉🎉
    1
  1188. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.🎉
    1
  1189. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"😱
    1
  1190. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1191. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,..
    1
  1192. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,,,
    1
  1193. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was,,,,
    1
  1194. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š...
    1
  1195. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,...
    1
  1196. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,...
    1
  1197. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,
    1
  1198. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,
    1
  1199. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,
    1
  1200. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏..
    1
  1201. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Aha
    1
  1202. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenme
    1
  1203. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.....
    1
  1204. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"....
    1
  1205. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history......
    1
  1206. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John....
    1
  1207. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God....
    1
  1208. There will be NO HUMILIATION when we look up the validity of the famous story of the adult eress woman, one that is the GO TO STORY pointed to, as the most beautiful of teachings of Jesus, and we realise that it is remo ved from modern translations because the story was A CONFIRMED INTER POL ATION, a froidd, AND NOT IN THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS. Even though this story, is a big part of our faith, which we use to show Jesus was all love đŸ€Š. We will not care. ( I mean the story itself contra bicted our beliefs, because we belive Jesus is si nless, and so should have st0n 3d the woman, but he didn't, meaning he was also a s1nner! But stop it. We don't use our brains and question nonsense. We says it's a mystery and blindly accept it) So what if church and Paul teach DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT. So what if Jesus refers to himself as a prophet, and is called by all those close to him! We will change the meanings of words to remain upon falsehood. GOD is now also a prophet because Jesus bought a message, and multiple ano nee mous authors 4 centuries after Jesus told us Jesus is God ( in gospel of John), and so God can also be a prophet. ( again, don't bother pointing out that if Jesus was indeed God, then that means he was D3C3IV ING THE PEOPLE, letting them believe he was a prophet when he was actually their God!, because we won't care) most of us haven't heard verses like john seven teen .3, 2wenty.7teen, unambiguous clear cut, not open to interpretation statements that clearly d35 troy our whole existence, because church pastors like to keep them quiet. So what if most of the statements we depend on, are metaphorical, and clearly refuted by verses from Jesus, so what if Jesus saying he is " Alpha and omega" is removed from modern translations because its yet another fraudlent insertion. Rev1.eleven john 5ive sev7 is one of our most famous frwdulent insertions, the trinity formula, johanine coma, it is also removed from all modern translations, because it is yet anothwer froid. Even though, all the inter pol ations, fraud and mi15 stranslations seem to be around who God is, and who Jesus is, alarm bells wont go off ringing. We will instead, insist the bible isn't kurpted. We will get angry with the Qur'an and Muslims for daring for suggesting it. Even though God says He doesn't accept human s4c rifice, we will insist Jesus the man, d13d for us. We know God is immortal, so we will reconcile by creating a second dimension of Jesus, where he is 100% man and 100% God, so we have a loophole. When muslims tell us God is immortal, and so Jesus can't be God, we will be able to say "his human nature d1 3d".... and if the Muslims say that God hay 8s uman s4c rifice, we can say "He was God in flesh" and it was a divine s4c ri fice! We appreciate when Jesus was asked the all important question about what was required for salvation, he didnt say believe i will dy for your sins, no, Jesus said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is one,...HOWEVER, we prefer the story paul and church taught us, this is much better for us as we don't have to s4c ri fice anymore, we just belive Jesus paid for our sins, and be sorry and bingo! And as you have seen so far, we aren't very s1n seer, so we see no in just iss when an innocent pays for the s1ns of the guilty, or when children inherit s1ns for krymez that had nothing to do with them. Even though this goes against all the previous messages and teachings, and original s1n is only found in pauls work and the last gospel John, we will accept this 3 vil concept. Again, we don't care that in Eze kiel 8teen .2wenty God tells us he hay 8s ORIGINAL S1N, BECAUSE HE IS JUST, and that we can be saved through repentance, not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin through his mercy, WITHOUT BLuD. ( WE COMPELTELY IGNORE THIS BECAUSE IT IS ISLAM ) ....also we can point to our false pro pet paul, who said we can do away with the old covenant. ( even though Jesus said that not one JOT shouldn't be kept until heaven and earth disappear ) they don't call us paul followers for nothing. We will insist Jesus is the only begotten son of God, even though David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. And we will say that the title 'son of man' is a divine title ( don't remind us eze keel is called son of man more times than Jesus ) We will claim Jesus was a willing s4k rifice even though Jesus begs, and cries all day to be saved from the cruc fiction. Jesus 'will' was to be saved, but he said he would accept whatever was God's will. We believe God DID NOT ANSWER Jesus prayers, and our God was stripped n4k3d, bee ten whyppd and kil d by men against his wishes. Even though all the disciples deserted Jesus, and there were no historical eyewitness, we will argue there are ( we only have jos ephus, who wasn't an eyewitness, and reported on rumours ) We will point to eye zayya 53, where Jesus meets absolutely NONE of the criteria, and ignore salm 9one where Jesus is mentioned by name, and says not even a bruise or cut would come to Jesus as God will send angels to protect him and raise him up We will ignore the letters of ignacious which writ to challenge the popular belief that the crucifixion of Jesus was an illusion. This proves in the 1st century, people were unsure if Jesus was crucified. We will insist a plural godhead of 3 fully God's is PURE MONOTHEISM. even we know its absurd, but if we keep insisting, we can be at peace with it. Our bible attributes much bad and f17th to Jesus that we wish it didn't, but we are good at spinning and miss represen tation of text, so we will twist our way out of it. Although we believe Jesus is God and always was, we will run whenever people respond to our critique of Islam, by showing 10x worse stuff our God Jesus commanded in the o.t. And for any of the bad stuff they show us from the n.t., we just say Jesus was teaching a parable 😉 always works đŸ’Ș We will continue spreading l13s about Islam, because it is the biggest thret to xtianity, many of our pristes, celebs, and in particular, our woman, are leaving paul anity for Islam by the fastest rate. The conversion rates are the highest, and most ree verts to Islam are white xtian woman! But, as malcolm once said, the media can make the innocent the gylty and the gylty the innocent, and the sion media is on our side, look at how easily we made the world believe they did nine wane wan, look how we lyde about sad damn, ga daf, luted them countries and now we are helping the sionist juws carry out a g3n 0cide on the nay tivs. ( we don't care the ones we help LITERALLY belive our God Jesus is boil ing in x crement and sea men)....
    1
  1209. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz..
    1
  1210. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„,..
    1
  1211. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. ,....
    1
  1212. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.......
    1
  1213. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt....
    1
  1214. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶.
    1
  1215. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  1216. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian..
    1
  1217. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction....
    1
  1218. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.........
    1
  1219. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  1220. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  1221. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  1222. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  1223. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian....
    1
  1224. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. 2 Chro fifteen And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul, but that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to devv whether young or old, man or woman. 2cor In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from truth 2 corin Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliev
    1
  1225. Jesus says to wipe out all non 🐝 lievers. They r ener mees. đŸ€Š Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  1226.  @srbob89  there are much b4dd3r ones but they get ree. Moved.
    1
  1227. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,....
    1
  1228. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you......,,,,
    1
  1229. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was,,,...
    1
  1230. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š,,
    1
  1231. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,,,,,
    1
  1232. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,
    1
  1233. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,,,,,
    1
  1234. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,
    1
  1235. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,,,,
    1
  1236. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏,,,,
    1
  1237. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Aha
    1
  1238. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.,,,,
    1
  1239. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.,,,,,
    1
  1240. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee".....
    1
  1241. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.....
    1
  1242. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John,,,,
    1
  1243. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God....
    1
  1244. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,.,.,.
    1
  1245. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,..
    1
  1246. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,..,.
    1
  1247. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt......
    1
  1248. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,....
    1
  1249. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,...
    1
  1250. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,.
    1
  1251. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations
    1
  1252. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.,,
    1
  1253. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God,,
    1
  1254. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!.,
    1
  1255. Christian ministers, the ones with oly spirit, are knwon for gruu mhing 8oys Muhammed was in an arranged marriage, not lu57in,.,
    1
  1256. ​ @peppersprayyy as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame,,
    1
  1257. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.
    1
  1258. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,....
    1
  1259. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  1260. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..
    1
  1261. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,..
    1
  1262. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,........
    1
  1263. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,
    1
  1264. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,...
    1
  1265. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,
    1
  1266. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves..,
    1
  1267. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  1268. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!
    1
  1269. Christian ministers, the ones with oly spirit, are knwon for gruu mhing 8oys Muhammed was in an arranged marriage, not lu57in
    1
  1270. occurred when he came across a temple to his dad, and found it full of moneylenders and animal-sellers. He was furious at this sacrilege, but he didn’t just get mad—he effectively Hulked out, flipping over tables and knocking over chairs. And then he stood guard at the door, to make sure no more jerks came in on non-worshipping business. As for as reasons for Jesus to be angry go, this is a solid one, but admittedly it doesn’t seem much in line with the “turn the other cheek” and “love your enemies” guy. (Matthew 21:12-13).
    1
  1271. Jesus tells parables in which beatings, and even killings, of household slaves are affirmed as disciplinary measures (for example, Luke 12:45-47 ). Paul warns the Corinthians, that as their “father,” he might return to them “with a rod,” presumably to beat them ( 1Cor 4:21 ).
    1
  1272. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  1273. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.
    1
  1274.  @laurentschmidt2758  Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  1275. ​ @laurentschmidt2758 So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  1276. ​ @laurentschmidt2758 A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  1277. ​ @laurentschmidt2758 Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  1278. ​ @laurentschmidt2758 Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  1279. Jesus said over and over he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He wasnt sent for us, nor was he brining anything new. he was THE WAY to God for them. as we see above, they had to add into the text, to change the purpose of Jesus, like the "great commission" or the things we find in the "long ending of Mark!". here, we find the re.sir.3ktion, Jesus sitting on the right side đŸ€Š, speaking in 👅etc in fact, he never teaches he is God, nor did he teach the trinity, which had to be added into the text as we see above. for exampe, in jon 17.3 he says whilst praying to the Father, that "this is 3ternal life, that they ( the children of Israel) may know YOU ( the father ) the ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus the Christ whom you have sent" this is the Shahada, the Muslim Vow. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1280. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    1
  1281. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  1282. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.
    1
  1283. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. ,..
    1
  1284. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.....
    1
  1285. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  1286. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶....
    1
  1287. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian......
    1
  1288. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction.
    1
  1289. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,.
    1
  1290. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,
    1
  1291. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,.
    1
  1292. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.
    1
  1293. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  1294. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,
    1
  1295. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,
    1
  1296. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..,,,
    1
  1297. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12..,
    1
  1298. There will be NO HUMILIATION when we look up the validity of the famous story of the adult eress woman, one that is the GO TO STORY pointed to, as the most beautiful of teachings of Jesus, and we realise that it is remo ved from modern translations because the story was A CONFIRMED INTER POL ATION, a froidd, AND NOT IN THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS. Even though this story, is a big part of our faith, which we use to show Jesus was all love đŸ€Š. We will not care. ( I mean the story itself contra bicted our beliefs, because we belive Jesus is si nless, and so should have st0n 3d the woman, but he didn't, meaning he was also a s1nner! But stop it. We don't use our brains and question nonsense. We says it's a mystery and blindly accept it) So what if church and Paul teach DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT. So what if Jesus refers to himself as a prophet, and is called by all those close to him! We will change the meanings of words to remain upon falsehood. GOD is now also a prophet because Jesus bought a message, and multiple ano nee mous authors 4 centuries after Jesus told us Jesus is God ( in gospel of John), and so God can also be a prophet. ( again, don't bother pointing out that if Jesus was indeed God, then that means he was D3C3IV ING THE PEOPLE, letting them believe he was a prophet when he was actually their God!, because we won't care) most of us haven't heard verses like john seven teen .3, 2wenty.7teen, unambiguous clear cut, not open to interpretation statements that clearly d35 troy our whole existence, because church pastors like to keep them quiet. So what if most of the statements we depend on, are metaphorical, and clearly refuted by verses from Jesus, so what if Jesus saying he is " Alpha and omega" is removed from modern translations because its yet another fraudlent insertion. Rev1.eleven john 5ive sev7 is one of our most famous frwdulent insertions, the trinity formula, johanine coma, it is also removed from all modern translations, because it is yet anothwer froid. Even though, all the inter pol ations, fraud and mi15 stranslations seem to be around who God is, and who Jesus is, alarm bells wont go off ringing. We will instead, insist the bible isn't kurpted. We will get angry with the Qur'an and Muslims for daring for suggesting it. Even though God says He doesn't accept human s4c rifice, we will insist Jesus the man, d13d for us. We know God is immortal, so we will reconcile by creating a second dimension of Jesus, where he is 100% man and 100% God, so we have a loophole. When muslims tell us God is immortal, and so Jesus can't be God, we will be able to say "his human nature d1 3d".... and if the Muslims say that God hay 8s uman s4c rifice, we can say "He was God in flesh" and it was a divine s4c ri fice! We appreciate when Jesus was asked the all important question about what was required for salvation, he didnt say believe i will dy for your sins, no, Jesus said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is one,...HOWEVER, we prefer the story paul and church taught us, this is much better for us as we don't have to s4c ri fice anymore, we just belive Jesus paid for our sins, and be sorry and bingo! And as you have seen so far, we aren't very s1n seer, so we see no in just iss when an innocent pays for the s1ns of the guilty, or when children inherit s1ns for krymez that had nothing to do with them. Even though this goes against all the previous messages and teachings, and original s1n is only found in pauls work and the last gospel John, we will accept this 3 vil concept. Again, we don't care that in Eze kiel 8teen .2wenty God tells us he hay 8s ORIGINAL S1N, BECAUSE HE IS JUST, and that we can be saved through repentance, not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin through his mercy, WITHOUT BLuD. ( WE COMPELTELY IGNORE THIS BECAUSE IT IS ISLAM ) ....also we can point to our false pro pet paul, who said we can do away with the old covenant. ( even though Jesus said that not one JOT shouldn't be kept until heaven and earth disappear ) they don't call us paul followers for nothing. We will insist Jesus is the only begotten son of God, even though David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. And we will say that the title 'son of man' is a divine title ( don't remind us eze keel is called son of man more times than Jesus ) We will claim Jesus was a willing s4k rifice even though Jesus begs, and cries all day to be saved from the cruc fiction. Jesus 'will' was to be saved, but he said he would accept whatever was God's will. We believe God DID NOT ANSWER Jesus prayers, and our God was stripped n4k3d, bee ten whyppd and kil d by men against his wishes. Even though all the disciples deserted Jesus, and there were no historical eyewitness, we will argue there are ( we only have jos ephus, who wasn't an eyewitness, and reported on rumours ) We will point to eye zayya 53, where Jesus meets absolutely NONE of the criteria, and ignore salm 9one where Jesus is mentioned by name, and says not even a bruise or cut would come to Jesus as God will send angels to protect him and raise him up We will ignore the letters of ignacious which writ to challenge the popular belief that the crucifixion of Jesus was an illusion. This proves in the 1st century, people were unsure if Jesus was crucified. We will insist a plural godhead of 3 fully God's is PURE MONOTHEISM. even we know its absurd, but if we keep insisting, we can be at peace with it. Our bible attributes much bad and f17th to Jesus that we wish it didn't, but we are good at spinning and miss represen tation of text, so we will twist our way out of it. Although we believe Jesus is God and always was, we will run whenever people respond to our critique of Islam, by showing 10x worse stuff our God Jesus commanded in the o.t. And for any of the bad stuff they show us from the n.t., we just say Jesus was teaching a parable 😉 always works đŸ’Ș We will continue spreading l13s about Islam, because it is the biggest thret to xtianity, many of our pristes, celebs, and in particular, our woman, are leaving paul anity for Islam by the fastest rate. The conversion rates are the highest, and most ree verts to Islam are white xtian woman! But, as malcolm once said, the media can make the innocent the gylty and the gylty the innocent, and the sion media is on our side, look at how easily we made the world believe they did nine wane wan, look how we lyde about sad damn, ga daf, luted them countries and now we are helping the sionist juws carry out a g3n 0cide on the nay tivs. ( we don't care the ones we help LITERALLY belive our God Jesus is boil ing in x crement and sea men)....
    1
  1299. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.,.
    1
  1300.  @jenni431  Regarding miracles, prophets were sent to their people with the same message of God, to worship him alone, and to follow his teachings given to the people by the prophet that was sent to them. in order to convince ppl, God allowed them to perform miracles, so that ppl would believe. you claimed that Jesus credits himself with the miracles, please can you show me where. in acts 2.22 God is credited with the miracles, not Jesus. "Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know" this is further confirmed in John 5.30 where Jesus says " I of myself can do NOTHING" no where does Jesus ever take credit for any works, but always points to his God the father. like Jesus, Muhammad was given many miracles, he split the moon, healed the sick, multiplied food etc and again, like all the prophets before, he confirmed that these miracles are NOT FROM HIMSELF, but from God who sent him. please also read Luke 1. 1 to 4 the anonymous author basically says...."many were writing about Jesus, so i also felt like writing a version"
    1
  1301.  @jenni431  it is inportant to read the context of verses, for example, when Jesus makes the claim " I and the father are one " when you read the context, its clear, he was talking about in a metaphorical sense. not only the context confirms this, but later on, Jesus refers back to this verse, and says, John 17.20 " You father are in me, and i in you, THEY MAY BE IN US.......the glory you have given to me, i have GIVEN TO THEM, that they may be ONE, JUST AS WE ARE ONE" so Jesus here is saying that he has now shared the glory, that the belivers will also be ONE WITH US, just as me and the father were one. there are 2 types of verses, ambigous and unambigous, its important to use unambigous verses, to understand ambigous verses that are open to interpretation. so if you had read jon 17.3. where Jesus makes it clear without a doubt, that the father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD, and Jesus was the Christ sent by the only true God, then when you read " i and the father are on" you would already have undestood it was talking about in purpose.
    1
  1302.  @jenni431  Jesus is not the only one to have had a miraculous birth, John the baptist had a miraculous birth. he was born to a barren mother who had no eggs. Jesus was born with eggs but without sperm. Eve was born with no mother or father, as was Adam. God simply says "Be" and it is. the whole point of the miraculous birth, is that Jesus HAD NO FATHER. that was the miracle. if God had pregnated her, it wasnt a miracle. you said "only a God can have a miraculous birth". Do you realise what you are saying? God is never born. in the melchisidek, has no mother or father, no beginning and no end. no lineage. By your logic, he would be a greater "God" than Jesus.
    1
  1303. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š.....
    1
  1304. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,......
    1
  1305. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,
    1
  1306. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical,,
    1
  1307. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,,,,
    1
  1308. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God
    1
  1309. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏....
    1
  1310. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.,,,
    1
  1311. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.,.,
    1
  1312. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.,,,,
    1
  1313. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"...
    1
  1314. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history......
    1
  1315. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John,,,
    1
  1316. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  1317.  @julievalencia8633  who wrote matthew?
    1
  1318. Who wrote matthew? According to early church tradition, originating with Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60–130 AD),[10] the gospel was written by Matthew the companion of Jesus, but this presents numerous problems.[9] Most modern scholars hold that it was written anonymously[8] in the last quarter of the first century by a male Jew who stood on the margin between traditional and nontraditional Jewish values and who was familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time
    1
  1319. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”
    1
  1320. Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.
    1
  1321. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
    1
  1322. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”
    1
  1323. In many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.
    1
  1324. Jesus said anyone who changes the law wud b the least in the kingdom. he warned against Paul, who came along later, claimed he saw Jesus in a dream, and then overturned everything Jesus taught in his ministry. Jesus knew there was a prophet to come after him, the prophet propehsied in the o.t. in the hundu scripts, etc thats why he said to watch out for folz ones like Paul. Jesus never ate pork, and circmszd, as did his discpliles. paul said eat what you want. Jesus paid the price. something Jesus never claimed he was here for. paul followers today r the biggest consumers. only the ch3wz and muz dont eat pork and crcmsze
    1
  1325.  @Disciple-ofChrist  They mistranslate our scripture from planner to deceiver. Meanwhile God and Jesus of the bible are proud deceivers 2 Kings 19:10 Verse Concepts “Thus you shall say to Hezekiah king of Judah, ‘Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you saying, “Jerusalem will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.” Isaiah 37:10 Verse Concepts “Thus you shall say to Hezekiah king of Judah, ‘Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you, saying, “Jerusalem will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.” Jeremiah 20:7 Verse Concepts O Lord, You have deceived me and I was deceived; You have overcome me and prevailed. I have become a laughingstock all day long; Everyone mocks me. Jeremiah 4:10 Verse Concepts Then I said, “Ah, Lord God! Surely You have utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace’; whereas a sword touches the throat.” Ezekiel 14:9 Verse Concepts “But if the prophet is prevailed upon to speak a word, it is I, the Lord, who have prevailed upon that prophet, and I will stretch out My hand against him and destroy him from among My people Israel. Our Latest Videos 0 seconds of 0 seconds 01:10   2 Thessalonians 2:11 Verse Concepts For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, Job 13:7 “Will you speak what is unjust for God, And speak what is deceitful for Him? 1 Kings 22:22 Verse Concepts lieingSpirit BeingsEnticingStrong Delusion LyingNames And Titles For SatanLying And Deceit The Lord said to him, ‘How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.’ 1 Kings 22:23 Verse Concepts Now therefore, behold, the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and the Lord has proclaimed disaster against you.”
    1
  1326. Jesus said anyone who changes the law wud b the least in the kingdom. he warned against Paul, who came along later, claimed he saw Jesus in a dream, and then overturned everything Jesus taught in his ministry. Jesus knew there was a prophet to come after him, the prophet propehsied in the o.t. in the hundu scripts, etc thats why he said to watch out for folz ones like Paul.
    1
  1327. Jesus never ate pok, and circmsz, as did his disciples. paul said eat what you want. Jesus paid the price. something Jesus never claimed he was here for. paul followers today r the biggest consumers. only the ch3wz and muz dont eat pork and crcmsze
    1
  1328.  @Apologia14  every prophet was a saviour to his people.. Adam is called son of God. David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. We bring the truth because your all upon fal53. Hood. You can't name one thing that was made up. It can all be verified. And it was all from YOUR sources. Unlike most of your lot, who will make things up from THEIR sources and do not even verify
    1
  1329. So julie here claims everything I quoted from your bible, the statements of Jesus, and the views of your scholars is all from say. Tang? Jesus said over and over that he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, to reaffirm the laws. He was the WAY for them. When he was asked by the rich ch33w, good master, what is required for everlasting life, Jesus first scolded the man for calling him Good, saying that only the Father God in heaven is good. He then told him, to keep the commandments and to follow him. What did Jesus say was the most important? That OUR LORD GOD IS ONE. He never said to belive in his ⚰ and they will be saved. In fact, Paul was first one to bring us riginal s777n. It's all from the deffil
    1
  1330. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.
    1
  1331.  @julievalencia8633  thanks. You have proved my point. None of you care what Jesus said. Just your desires. Jesus never claims to be God in the Bible, rather he tells you like all his prophet brothers that the father is the only true God. And you pin your hopes of salvation on the invention of riginal s777n of Paul. H.crits. is what you are, and you will have no excuse. Your received the truth, but chose to follow your doctrination 🙏
    1
  1332.  @MelodieMarshall  There will be NO HUMILIATION when we look up the validity of the famous story of the adult eress woman, one that is the GO TO STORY pointed to, as the most beautiful of teachings of Jesus, and we realise that it is remo ved from modern translations because the story was A CONFIRMED INTER POL ATION, a froidd, AND NOT IN THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS. Even though this story, is a big part of our faith, which we use to show Jesus was all love đŸ€Š. We will not care. ( I mean the story itself contra bicted our beliefs, because we belive Jesus is si nless, and so should have st0n 3d the woman, but he didn't, meaning he was also a s1nner! But stop it. We don't use our brains and question nonsense. We says it's a mystery and blindly accept it) So what if church and Paul teach DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT. So what if Jesus refers to himself as a prophet, and is called by all those close to him! We will change the meanings of words to remain upon falsehood. GOD is now also a prophet because Jesus bought a message, and multiple ano nee mous authors 4 centuries after Jesus told us Jesus is God ( in gospel of John), and so God can also be a prophet. ( again, don't bother pointing out that if Jesus was indeed God, then that means he was D3C3IV ING THE PEOPLE, letting them believe he was a prophet when he was actually their God!, because we won't care) most of us haven't heard verses like john seven teen .3, 2wenty.7teen, unambiguous clear cut, not open to interpretation statements that clearly d35 troy our whole existence, because church pastors like to keep them quiet. So what if most of the statements we depend on, are metaphorical, and clearly refuted by verses from Jesus, so what if Jesus saying he is " Alpha and omega" is removed from modern translations because its yet another fraudlent insertion. Rev1.eleven john 5ive sev7 is one of our most famous frwdulent insertions, the trinity formula, johanine coma, it is also removed from all modern translations, because it is yet anothwer froid. Even though, all the inter pol ations, fraud and mi15 stranslations seem to be around who God is, and who Jesus is, alarm bells wont go off ringing. We will instead, insist the bible isn't kurpted. We will get angry with the Qur'an and Muslims for daring for suggesting it. Even though God says He doesn't accept human s4c rifice, we will insist Jesus the man, d13d for us. We know God is immortal, so we will reconcile by creating a second dimension of Jesus, where he is 100% man and 100% God, so we have a loophole. When muslims tell us God is immortal, and so Jesus can't be God, we will be able to say "his human nature d1 3d".... and if the Muslims say that God hay 8s uman s4c rifice, we can say "He was God in flesh" and it was a divine s4c ri fice! We appreciate when Jesus was asked the all important question about what was required for salvation, he didnt say believe i will dy for your sins, no, Jesus said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is one,...HOWEVER, we prefer the story paul and church taught us, this is much better for us as we don't have to s4c ri fice anymore, we just belive Jesus paid for our sins, and be sorry and bingo! And as you have seen so far, we aren't very s1n seer, so we see no in just iss when an innocent pays for the s1ns of the guilty, or when children inherit s1ns for krymez that had nothing to do with them. Even though this goes against all the previous messages and teachings, and original s1n is only found in pauls work and the last gospel John, we will accept this 3 vil concept. Again, we don't care that in Eze kiel 8teen .2wenty God tells us he hay 8s ORIGINAL S1N, BECAUSE HE IS JUST, and that we can be saved through repentance, not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin through his mercy, WITHOUT BLuD. ( WE COMPELTELY IGNORE THIS BECAUSE IT IS ISLAM ) ....also we can point to our false pro pet paul, who said we can do away with the old covenant. ( even though Jesus said that not one JOT shouldn't be kept until heaven and earth disappear ) they don't call us paul followers for nothing. We will insist Jesus is the only begotten son of God, even though David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. And we will say that the title 'son of man' is a divine title ( don't remind us eze keel is called son of man more times than Jesus ) We will claim Jesus was a willing s4k rifice even though Jesus begs, and cries all day to be saved from the cruc fiction. Jesus 'will' was to be saved, but he said he would accept whatever was God's will. We believe God DID NOT ANSWER Jesus prayers, and our God was stripped n4k3d, bee ten whyppd and kil d by men against his wishes. Even though all the disciples deserted Jesus, and there were no historical eyewitness, we will argue there are ( we only have jos ephus, who wasn't an eyewitness, and reported on rumours ) We will point to eye zayya 53, where Jesus meets absolutely NONE of the criteria, and ignore salm 9one where Jesus is mentioned by name, and says not even a bruise or cut would come to Jesus as God will send angels to protect him and raise him up We will ignore the letters of ignacious which writ to challenge the popular belief that the crucifixion of Jesus was an illusion. This proves in the 1st century, people were unsure if Jesus was crucified. We will insist a plural godhead of 3 fully God's is PURE MONOTHEISM. even we know its absurd, but if we keep insisting, we can be at peace with it. Our bible attributes much bad and f17th to Jesus that we wish it didn't, but we are good at spinning and miss represen tation of text, so we will twist our way out of it. Although we believe Jesus is God and always was, we will run whenever people respond to our critique of Islam, by showing 10x worse stuff our God Jesus commanded in the o.t. And for any of the bad stuff they show us from the n.t., we just say Jesus was teaching a parable 😉 always works đŸ’Ș We will continue spreading l13s about Islam, because it is the biggest thret to xtianity, many of our pristes, celebs, and in particular, our woman, are leaving paul anity for Islam by the fastest rate. The conversion rates are the highest, and most ree verts to Islam are white xtian woman! But, as malcolm once said, the media can make the innocent the gylty and the gylty the innocent, and the sion media is on our side, look at how easily we made the world believe they did nine wane wan, look how we lyde about sad damn, ga daf, luted them countries and now we are helping the sionist juws carry out a g3n 0cide on the nay tivs. ( we don't care the ones we help LITERALLY belive our God Jesus is boil ing in x crement and sea men)....
    1
  1333. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  1334. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz
    1
  1335. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed
    1
  1336. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„
    1
  1337.  @AutististicSchizo  How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  1338. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. [Luke 22:70 KJV] and And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it. [Luke 23:3 KJV] mark. .“I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” sadly these books of rumours cant agree with one another
    1
  1339. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. Luke 22:70 and And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it. [Luke 23:3 mark. .“I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” sadly these books of rumours cant agree with one another
    1
  1340. Nothing changes the fact Jesus confirms the father is the only true God. David is called the begotten son of God, Adam is the son of God all in the bible
    1
  1341. Muhammed taught anyone who harms a non combatant wont even smell paradise. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non combtnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins to be harm3d. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam. its shockin how much they make things up, but its cool. they wil need to answer for all their actions
    1
  1342. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non comb..tnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins to be ha4rm3d. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam. its shockin how much they make things up, but its cool. they wil need to answer for all their actions
    1
  1343. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non comb..tnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins not to be ha4rm3d.
    1
  1344. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam. its shockin how much they make things up, but its cool. they wil need to answer for all their actions
    1
  1345. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non comb..tnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins not to be ha4rm3d.
    1
  1346. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam.
    1
  1347. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non comb..tnts, religious leaders worshippers or bildins not to be ha4rm3d.
    1
  1348. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam.
    1
  1349. the amount of f188z spread here is unblievable the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam.
    1
  1350.  @R3DASH09  no, only Paul and church followers will do that. Jesus himself said according to you bible, that the Father is the only true God. 17 3 jon I go to my father and your father, my God and your God 20.17 jon
    1
  1351. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  1352. No, the more you ly3, the more Paul followers, the h0n35t ones, study, and realise Islam is the only religion God sent. From Adam thru Abraham Moses Jesus and Muhammed. May peace be upon them. An innocent is the same across the board. Islam teaches to be just with everyone be it belivers or non believers. It teaches that even even in a time of woarw, only combat4nt5 can be Fort. Unlike the bible, where women, and babies r fair game
    1
  1353. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian
    1
  1354. Jesus says to wipe out all non 🐝 lievers. They r ener mees. đŸ€Š Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  1355. Don't forget 1. Samuel These ppl r nothing but m15. Guy. Ded. And that's why there r so many channels about that spread and make things up about the only religion of God... This was what shayyy. Tang promised, he would take the children of Adam away from worshipping their creator, and he does this thru these ppl who are mostly ins7nseer. These r the people who see clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus in their bible, telling them the father is the only true God, and they disagree and point to metaphors and read into things that aren't there
    1
  1356. They mistranslate our scripture from planner to deceiver. Meanwhile God and Jesus of the bible are proud deceivers 2 Kings 19:10 Verse Concepts “Thus you shall say to Hezekiah king of Judah, ‘Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you saying, “Jerusalem will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.” Isaiah 37:10 Verse Concepts “Thus you shall say to Hezekiah king of Judah, ‘Do not let your God in whom you trust deceive you, saying, “Jerusalem will not be given into the hand of the king of Assyria.” Jeremiah 20:7 Verse Concepts O Lord, You have deceived me and I was deceived; You have overcome me and prevailed. I have become a laughingstock all day long; Everyone mocks me. Jeremiah 4:10 Verse Concepts Then I said, “Ah, Lord God! Surely You have utterly deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, ‘You will have peace’; whereas a sword touches the throat.” Ezekiel 14:9 Verse Concepts “But if the prophet is prevailed upon to speak a word, it is I, the Lord, who have prevailed upon that prophet, and I will stretch out My hand against him and destroy him from among My people Israel. Our Latest Videos 0 seconds of 0 seconds 01:10   2 Thessalonians 2:11 Verse Concepts For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, Job 13:7 “Will you speak what is unjust for God, And speak what is deceitful for Him? 1 Kings 22:22 Verse Concepts lieingSpirit BeingsEnticingStrong Delusion LyingNames And Titles For SatanLying And Deceit The Lord said to him, ‘How?’ And he said, ‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ Then He said, ‘You are to entice him and also prevail. Go and do so.’ 1 Kings 22:23 Verse Concepts Now therefore, behold, the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; and the Lord has proclaimed disaster against you.”
    1
  1357. Jesus never spoke English. Abba is only 3 times in n.t. twice in paul which is toilet paper, and once in Mark, likely inserted
    1
  1358. It's diabolical who not 0.nest Christians are. I'm lost for words. How can they lie so much about Islam, and their own religion. Wow
    1
  1359. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    1
  1360. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..
    1
  1361. “Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded. “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD’s people. ..,
    1
  1362. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  1363. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  1364. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia
    1
  1365. as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. Who have yet to gnow a The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame
    1
  1366. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.
    1
  1367. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,.,.
    1
  1368. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,
    1
  1369. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,..
    1
  1370. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,
    1
  1371. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,.,.
    1
  1372. Name one thing that was made up
    1
  1373. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  1374. 👉 Jesus: I didn't come to a80..7ish the Laws! (Matt 5.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No, you came to a8.o071sh it all! The law brings r4.th, and where there is no law, there is no trniz. Gr3sion! This is what Paul said! 👉 Jesus: If you love me keep my commandments! (John 14.15) đŸ€Š The Church: No, don't listen to him Christians! If you love him then keep the Church Commandments built by Paul, the early Christian purs3. Cute. T0.r! 👉 Jesus: I never ate p0.k and so you should as God Commanded! (John 7.19) đŸ€Š The Church: No! p0.k is good! 👉 Jesus: I've finished all the work that God gave me before my departure! (John 17.4) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You waited till you ascend to heaven and came in a dream to an early Christian purs3. Kut3. T0r to negate everything you've preached for 33 years!
    1
  1375. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.” Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church. wake up! they had to add the trinity later Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version...,,.,
    1
  1376.  @Mr.Potts05  A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  1377.  @kamildoe33  Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  1378. Who follows Jesus? Muslims or Paul followers? 👉 Jesus: The only true God is The Father! (john 17.3) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You're also a true god! 👉 Jesus: By myself I can do nothing! (john 5.30) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You can do everything! 👉 Jesus: The Lord our God is ONE! (mark 12.29) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The lord our god is three in one! 👉 Jesus: If you want eternal life then keep The Commandments! (Matt 19.17) đŸ€Š The Church: No! If you want eternal life then believe that Jesus died for your sins! 👉 Jesus: I cried and prayed to God PBTH to save me from the crucifixion and God heard my prayers! (Matt 26.36) đŸ€Š The Church: No! God didn't save him so we can be saved by his bl0u1d! 👉 Jesus: My Father is greater than I, my Father is greater than all! (John 14.28) đŸ€Š The Church: No! The Father is not greater than you, you're both co-equal! 👉 Jesus: I was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel, not the g3.n.tiles! (Matt 15.23, 10.5) đŸ€Š The Church: No! You were sent to the entire world!
    1
  1379.  @Vjjuicer  hi sweety, your historians say Mary was 12 when with her husband of 90 joseph
    1
  1380.  @kamildoe33  Alhamdulillah for Islam. Even their own bible makes it clear Jesus was a prophet. Its clear they had to change the bible, over and over, to establish a trinity, something no prophet including Jesus ever taught
    1
  1381.  @kamildoe33  the God of the Bible doesn't love everyone, stop going round speaking things that you have no idea about
    1
  1382. Alhamdulillah for Islam, the only relig God ever gave us, from Adam, thru Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad - pbut Paul followers will change the meanin of words to remain upon his religion. usually when you tell them Jesus was a prophet, they claim "NO, thats no were in the bible" then when you show them tens of verses as well as verses where Jesus himslef calls himself a prophet, they say " God is also a prophet" or like kamil, they will claim " its talking about John the baptist" after he studies, and realises Jesus is talking about himself, he too will come back and say "God can be a prophet" this is why i can never be a paul follower. im too 0. nest with myself
    1
  1383. Hello Angels, Islam started with Adam. It's the only religion God gave us. To recognise the one true God, and follow his messengers who he sent for us. All prophets were sent to specific ppl, except Muhammad, who was sent for all mankind with the final revelation. Christianity started with Paul and church. Jesus was a Muslim like all the prophets. Wake up steeple Peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1384. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  1385. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,.,.,
    1
  1386. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,
    1
  1387. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,...
    1
  1388. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,,,
    1
  1389. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt.....
    1
  1390. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.......,,..
    1
  1391. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,...,.
    1
  1392. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  1393. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.,.,,
    1
  1394. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God..,.
    1
  1395. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  1396. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.
    1
  1397. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. ,....
    1
  1398. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety...
    1
  1399. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt...
    1
  1400. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶..
    1
  1401. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  1402. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian.......
    1
  1403. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction....
    1
  1404. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,.,
    1
  1405. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was😼
    1
  1406. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,🎉
    1
  1407. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..❀
    1
  1408. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,😼😅😱
    1
  1409. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,🎉
    1
  1410. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.😼
    1
  1411. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,🎉😱
    1
  1412. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,🎉
    1
  1413. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏
    1
  1414. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€ŠđŸŽ‰
    1
  1415. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history
    1
  1416. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  1417. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz
    1
  1418. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.🎉
    1
  1419. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation
    1
  1420. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"
    1
  1421. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1422. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  1423. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.
    1
  1424. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.,.,.
    1
  1425. Muhammed taught anyone who harms a non combatant wont even smell paradise. Islam teaches even in a state of w4w, non combtnts, women, childrn, religious leaders worshippers or bildins to be harm3d. the amount of f188z spread here just confirm what we alreddy know. the shayy. tann works in th353 l13rs to take people away from the religion of God, the religon that Jesus and Muhammad taught. Islam. its shockin how much they make things up, but its cool. they wil need to answer for all their actions
    1
  1426. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God.
    1
  1427. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,...
    1
  1428. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you......
    1
  1429. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was......
    1
  1430. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š,,,,
    1
  1431. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,...
    1
  1432. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,
    1
  1433. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,,,,
    1
  1434. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,,
    1
  1435. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,., ...
    1
  1436. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏,,,
    1
  1437. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz....
    1
  1438. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.,,,
    1
  1439. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.,,,,
    1
  1440. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"....
    1
  1441. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.,,,,,
    1
  1442. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John,,
    1
  1443.  @AhmedElmanzalawi  I know, it's for the phobes. Sorry
    1
  1444.  @jamiedunne2671  đŸ€ŁđŸ€ŁđŸ€Ł
    1
  1445.  @jamiedunne2671  Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John
    1
  1446.  @jamiedunne2671  Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.
    1
  1447.  @jamiedunne2671  So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  1448.  @jamiedunne2671  For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  1449. all the gospels are anonymous and that's according to your scholarship. Jesus never saw wrote or approved any of it. Read luke 1. 1 to 4 The author says...many ppl were writing about Jesus, so I felt like riting my own version. đŸ€Š
    1
  1450.  @jamiedunne2671  A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  1451.  @jamiedunne2671  Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of Jon
    1
  1452.  @jamiedunne2671  the ch3wz were before Jesus, they claim him and his mum weren't good. They say you took their book, and turned their God into a trinity. They must be right cos they wer before right? You ppl đŸ€Š It dint matter it he came 6k yrs later, if the source is from God
    1
  1453. There will be NO HUMILIATION when we look up the validity of the famous story of the adult eress woman, one that is the GO TO STORY pointed to, as the most beautiful of teachings of Jesus, and we realise that it is remo ved from modern translations because the story was A CONFIRMED INTER POL ATION, a froidd, AND NOT IN THE EARLY MANUSCRIPTS. Even though this story, is a big part of our faith, which we use to show Jesus was all love đŸ€Š. We will not care. ( I mean the story itself contra bicted our beliefs, because we belive Jesus is si nless, and so should have st0n 3d the woman, but he didn't, meaning he was also a s1nner! But stop it. We don't use our brains and question nonsense. We says it's a mystery and blindly accept it) So what if church and Paul teach DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT JESUS TAUGHT. So what if Jesus refers to himself as a prophet, and is called by all those close to him! We will change the meanings of words to remain upon falsehood. GOD is now also a prophet because Jesus bought a message, and multiple ano nee mous authors 4 centuries after Jesus told us Jesus is God ( in gospel of John), and so God can also be a prophet. ( again, don't bother pointing out that if Jesus was indeed God, then that means he was D3C3IV ING THE PEOPLE, letting them believe he was a prophet when he was actually their God!, because we won't care) most of us haven't heard verses like john seven teen .3, 2wenty.7teen, unambiguous clear cut, not open to interpretation statements that clearly d35 troy our whole existence, because church pastors like to keep them quiet. So what if most of the statements we depend on, are metaphorical, and clearly refuted by verses from Jesus, so what if Jesus saying he is " Alpha and omega" is removed from modern translations because its yet another fraudlent insertion. Rev1.eleven john 5ive sev7 is one of our most famous frwdulent insertions, the trinity formula, johanine coma, it is also removed from all modern translations, because it is yet anothwer froid. Even though, all the inter pol ations, fraud and mi15 stranslations seem to be around who God is, and who Jesus is, alarm bells wont go off ringing. We will instead, insist the bible isn't kurpted. We will get angry with the Qur'an and Muslims for daring for suggesting it. Even though God says He doesn't accept human s4c rifice, we will insist Jesus the man, d13d for us. We know God is immortal, so we will reconcile by creating a second dimension of Jesus, where he is 100% man and 100% God, so we have a loophole. When muslims tell us God is immortal, and so Jesus can't be God, we will be able to say "his human nature d1 3d".... and if the Muslims say that God hay 8s uman s4c rifice, we can say "He was God in flesh" and it was a divine s4c ri fice! We appreciate when Jesus was asked the all important question about what was required for salvation, he didnt say believe i will dy for your sins, no, Jesus said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is one,...HOWEVER, we prefer the story paul and church taught us, this is much better for us as we don't have to s4c ri fice anymore, we just belive Jesus paid for our sins, and be sorry and bingo! And as you have seen so far, we aren't very s1n seer, so we see no in just iss when an innocent pays for the s1ns of the guilty, or when children inherit s1ns for krymez that had nothing to do with them. Even though this goes against all the previous messages and teachings, and original s1n is only found in pauls work and the last gospel John, we will accept this 3 vil concept. Again, we don't care that in Eze kiel 8teen .2wenty God tells us he hay 8s ORIGINAL S1N, BECAUSE HE IS JUST, and that we can be saved through repentance, not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin through his mercy, WITHOUT BLuD. ( WE COMPELTELY IGNORE THIS BECAUSE IT IS ISLAM ) ....also we can point to our false pro pet paul, who said we can do away with the old covenant. ( even though Jesus said that not one JOT shouldn't be kept until heaven and earth disappear ) they don't call us paul followers for nothing. We will insist Jesus is the only begotten son of God, even though David is called begotten of God by God in the Bible. And we will say that the title 'son of man' is a divine title ( don't remind us eze keel is called son of man more times than Jesus ) We will claim Jesus was a willing s4k rifice even though Jesus begs, and cries all day to be saved from the cruc fiction. Jesus 'will' was to be saved, but he said he would accept whatever was God's will. We believe God DID NOT ANSWER Jesus prayers, and our God was stripped n4k3d, bee ten whyppd and kil d by men against his wishes. Even though all the disciples deserted Jesus, and there were no historical eyewitness, we will argue there are ( we only have jos ephus, who wasn't an eyewitness, and reported on rumours ) We will point to eye zayya 53, where Jesus meets absolutely NONE of the criteria, and ignore salm 9one where Jesus is mentioned by name, and says not even a bruise or cut would come to Jesus as God will send angels to protect him and raise him up We will ignore the letters of ignacious which writ to challenge the popular belief that the crucifixion of Jesus was an illusion. This proves in the 1st century, people were unsure if Jesus was crucified. We will insist a plural godhead of 3 fully God's is PURE MONOTHEISM. even we know its absurd, but if we keep insisting, we can be at peace with it. Our bible attributes much bad and f17th to Jesus that we wish it didn't, but we are good at spinning and miss represen tation of text, so we will twist our way out of it. Although we believe Jesus is God and always was, we will run whenever people respond to our critique of Islam, by showing 10x worse stuff our God Jesus commanded in the o.t. And for any of the bad stuff they show us from the n.t., we just say Jesus was teaching a parable 😉 always works đŸ’Ș We will continue spreading l13s about Islam, because it is the biggest thret to xtianity, many of our pristes, celebs, and in particular, our woman, are leaving paul anity for Islam by the fastest rate. The conversion rates are the highest, and most ree verts to Islam are white xtian woman! But, as malcolm once said, the media can make the innocent the gylty and the gylty the innocent, and the sion media is on our side, look at how easily we made the world believe they did nine wane wan, look how we lyde about sad damn, ga daf, luted them countries and now we are helping the sionist juws carry out a g3n 0cide on the nay tivs. ( we don't care the ones we help LITERALLY belive our God Jesus is boil ing in x crement and sea men)....
    1
  1454. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™€đŸ‘©đŸ‘±â€â™€đŸ‘±â€â™‚đŸ‘¶đŸź â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„ the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶
    1
  1455. and this is why there are no statements from Jesus calling himself God, so christians are left with metaphors, and m155.trains.late.ions as their evidences whilst ignorin the clear cut unambigous statements, like jon 20.17, where he says he "goes to my father and your father, my God and your God" unknowingly, its paul who they follow, a man who never met JEsus and overturned everything Jesus had bought. in fact, its paul who made up riginal s77n, that God cannot for...give, so needs a payment, in b70uoid. these unn.just concepts, that we inherit s77n, that Jesus ⚰ for the gill.tee are not from God, read ezek 1820, where God says doesnt do riginal s777ns, BECAUSE ITS UNnn.JUST, and that he can forgive the wr5t if they repent and thru his mercy, he forgives, because he is JUST.
    1
  1456. this is what every prophet taught us, and they were sent to their people with these main concepts, but varying rules for the times and the ppl they were sent to. Only the final prophet, Muhammad, was sent to ALL MANKIND, and bought the FINAL revelation, which God promised to preserve. this duty to preserve the previous texts was given to the ra88is, but they change it up for a pretty penny. th problem is shayy.tannn does not want ppl to know the truth, and so we find sooo many are out there, makin things up about Islam and final prophet. but in this day and age, in this technological era, ppl can find the truth if they want it. only those worthy will see it tho. may peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1457. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over themâ€”đŸ˜„đŸ˜„đŸ˜„ bring them heređŸ˜„ and *** themđŸ˜„ in front of međŸ˜„
    1
  1458. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
    1
  1459. What about “He who is without s77n, should k4st the f1r5t”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.
    1
  1460. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.
    1
  1461. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,
    1
  1462. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,
    1
  1463. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..
    1
  1464. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,...
    1
  1465. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalon
    1
  1466. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  1467. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. ..,,
    1
  1468. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Vgin may live; you may keep them for yourselves.., Jesus who they claim was ALWAYS God...
    1
  1469. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!..
    1
  1470. as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame
    1
  1471. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,...
    1
  1472. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz
    1
  1473. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„,..
    1
  1474. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un alibed. ,...,
    1
  1475. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety...
    1
  1476. these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 80ml christians in egypt...
    1
  1477. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. đŸ‘¶.
    1
  1478. Jesus says to wipe out all non lievers. They r ener mees. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.,,
    1
  1479. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonian..
    1
  1480. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction....
    1
  1481. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.......
    1
  1482.  @mmcinva1  you're not a target for that. These r just things made up by xtians cos they're women are all becoming Muslim.
    1
  1483. The problem is ppl like you who belive anything they read without actually thinking about what they are being b washed to belive.
    1
  1484. Lords
    1
  1485. Resistance
    1
  1486. 4rmy
    1
  1487. Nigeria is both ways, they are doing the same to each other
    1
  1488. Christianity’s holiest site is Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The Church marks the site where Christians falsely believe that Jesus was cruse. sified, burrd, and rose from the dw34d. The Church contains the “Stone of Unction.” It is believed that Jesus’s body was laid on this stone while being prepared for burial. Christians make pilgrimage to the Church and ritually kiss the Stone of Unction, owing to its perceived connection with God (i.e., Jesus)
    1
  1489. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,😼😼
    1
  1490. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,😼
    1
  1491. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,â€đŸŽ‰
    1
  1492. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,😼😼
    1
  1493. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏🎉
    1
  1494. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.
    1
  1495. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.😼😊
    1
  1496. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.🎉
    1
  1497. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"😼
    1
  1498. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1499. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.😼
    1
  1500. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John😱
    1
  1501. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,
    1
  1502. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million deafz 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million deafz 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million deafz 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million deafz 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million deafz 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million deafz.,,.
    1
  1503.  @kimchimmy9276  đŸ€Ł
    1
  1504. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well...
    1
  1505. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.....
    1
  1506. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,
    1
  1507. On 3 October 2021, a prayer house in Roorkee was allegedly vandalised by a mob of nearly 250 people after accusing Pentecostal evangelist Prio Sadhna Potter and those present of illegal conversions. The following month, members of the Bajrang Dal and the RSS allegedly vandalised a newly set up church in Delhi’s Dwarka area. The people who were participating in the Sunday prayer meeting at the Church were accused of violating the Delhi Disaster Management Act (DDMA) guidelines as the premises had not been officially registered as a religious site. On 12 December 2021, members of Hindu right-wing groups allegedly set fire to Christian religious books in Karnataka’s Kolar district. According to a report by NDTV, this was the “38th attack on religious minorities in Karnataka in the last 12 months”. The report also said that the number of attacks on the community has increased ever since the government started considering a bill to ban forcible religious conversion.,.,.
    1
  1508. A year later, amidst the festivities of Christmas, a spate of attacks against Christians angered the community. They eventually staged a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar a few weeks ago, saying that, “Our people are being beaten up.” The first attack among these was on December 20, 2022, when a man dressed up as Santa Claus was beaten up by a Hindutva mob in a residential colony in the Makarpura area, Vadodara in Gujarat. According to media reports, the victim, Shashikant Dabhi, dressed up as Santa Claus entered the Avdhoot society in Makarpura where Christian families were celebrating the Christmas fervor.,.
    1
  1509. Delhi in that year saw a whole of six attacks on Churches and a Christian school - which included alleged arson attacks on churches in Rohini and Dilshad Garden along with acts of vandalism in churches in Jasola and Vikaspuri. Fast-forward a couple of years, at least 305 incidents of violence against Christians were recorded in the first nine months of 2021, according to a fact-finding report released by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights, United Against Hate, and United Christian Forum. Some of these have been reported from states such as Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttarakhand.
    1
  1510. The same year saw another wave of attacks directed against Christian churches and prayer halls in Karnataka by the Hindu organisation Bajrang Dal. The violence first erupted on 14 September when about 20 churches were vandalised in various districts of Karnataka including Mangalore, Udupi, and Chikkamagaluru among others. During the same attacks, several symbols of Christianity were under threat in Tamil Nadu. Three churches in Erode and Karur districts were stoned, a statue of Mother Mary in Krishnagiri was stolen and an idol of Jesus in Madurai was vandalised - all in over five days.
    1
  1511. pitted as the worst year for Indian Christians in the history of post-Independence India, according to a similar report released by the Catholic Secular Forum (CSF). The forum compiles statistics with regard to cases of religious persecution of Christians for decades. Their data shows there have been at least 365 major attacks on community members as well as institutions for practising and spreading their faith
    1
  1512. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....
    1
  1513. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12....
    1
  1514. Muhammed taught anyone who harms inocent wont even smell paradise. Cannot belive the amount of rubbish thus podcast members just spewed. Unbelievable but what we know they are doin. Shay...tannn promised to take man away from recognising their creator. So he uses these ppl to make things up about the religion of God..,.
    1
  1515. Critics as usual apply ‘cut and choose’ approach with regards to this passage (Quran 2:191). They only quote, “And ciw them wherever you find them
(2:191). However, when we read the passage in its context (2:190-195) it says opposite what they portray of the verse. Quran 2:190 – 195 2:190 Fight in the way of God those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. God does not like transgressors. 2:191 And ciw them wherever you find them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah [Persecution] is worse than kiwing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kiw them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. 2:192 And if they cease, then indeed, God is Forgiving and Merciful. 2:193 Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah [Persecution] and [until] worship is for God. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors. 2:194 [Fighting in] the sacred month is for [aggression committed in] the sacred month, and for [all] violations is legal retribution. So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you. And fear God and know that God is with those who fear Him. 2:195 And spend in the way of God and do not throw [yourselves] with your [own] hands into destruction [by refraining]. And do good; indeed, God loves the doers of good. It’s important whenever one reads a Quranic verse, to read it in its context. As you have read, critics only quote the part which suites them, they isolate previous verses and the ones after. When the passage is examined in context, it is clear that nowhere does it sanction the kiwing of innocent people. From verse 2:190 to 2:195, when read, Allah makes it evident to fight those only who fight them, fighting in self-defence. Another thing some love to do with the verse is, change the Arabic word’s meaning. Example, the Arabic word ‘Fitna’ used in 2:191 and 2:193, they deceptively have translated the word as ‘disbelief’. So, when it’s read in that perspective, the passage is implying to fight to those who are disbelievers, just because of their religion. This again when we examine it, it will turn out to be a lie. The Arabic word ‘Fitnah’ means ‘persecution’, ‘corruption’, ‘sedition’. But when the word ‘Fitnah’ is used in verse 2:191 and 2:193 it means ‘persecution’
    1
  1516.  @SourdoughJesusFreak  that's cos they were presented to you out of context
    1
  1517. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..
    1
  1518. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  1519. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.
    1
  1520. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia
    1
  1521. The God of the Bible explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and c03ced marriage of fur. ginz along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations. Based on stories of sex and marriage that God rewards and appears to approve one might add incest to the mix of sexual contact that receives divine sanction.
    1
  1522. Now, you seem like a reas9nable person, so please study
    1
  1523. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later
    1
  1524. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..,,
    1
  1525. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was,..,
    1
  1526. For me, the biggest evidence is that Paul followers ALWAYS QUOTE PAUL, OR THE LAST GOSPEL JOHN, as their evidences And their own scholars say John is the LEAST AUTHENTIC, written by multiple authors, hundreds of miles and years away from Jesus. And this is the book that elevates Jesus, at least tries. They never ever quote Mark or luke, the earlier Gospels, where Jesus is a prophet and messiah, sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, by his own admission. This is the biggest red flag that Paul followers are misguided. ALL THEIR favourite quotes come from the froindulent Gospel of John. Even Mark isn't safe. 16.8 is where Mark ends,as the earliest manuscripts end there.. But the 'long ending' of Mark, 16.9 to 20, has the resurrection, Jesus sitting on right side of God etc Their own academia acknowledge this, that 9 to 20 are later interpolation and its common knowledge except for the blind followers who have not studied what they are basing their salvation on đŸ€Š
    1
  1527. Xtians claim that Jesus dng for our sins was prophesied in O.t. even though Jesus never ever made such a claim The prophesy đŸ€Š 1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "He" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses). 2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the deff of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not kiwd. But let us go with kiwd for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never kiwd. 3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this: Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object. 4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. "in his deff" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in deff", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon: There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy: Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels. Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was alone. 5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children. 6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto deff. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto defff means to me that Jesus' life will overpower def! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ😱,,.,
    1
  1528. Look at what the bible says regarding salvation. Even the wickedest of the wicked can save themselves by repentance. Not just forgiven, God says He will forget the sin. And he says the son will not bare the inequities of the father ( original sin) and vice versa because God is just. Please explain why salvation was possible thru repentance, but after Paul's work, there is no salvation except by blood? He will not dye for his father’s sin; he will surely live. 18But his father will dye for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. 19“Yet you ask, ‘Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?’ Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. 20The one who sins is the one who will dye. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them. 21“But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not dye. 22None of the offenses they have committed will be remembered against them. Because of the righteous things they have done, they will live. 23Do I take any pleasure in the deff of the wicked? declares the Sovereign Lord. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? 24“But if a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked person does, will they live? None of the righteous things that person has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness they are guilty of and because of the sins they have committed, they will dye. 25“Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Hear, you Israelites: Is my way unjust? Is it not your ways that are unjust? 26If a righteous person turns from their righteousness and commits sin, they will dye for it; because of the sin they have committed they will dye. 27But if a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life,,,.,.,,
    1
  1529. Islam didn't invent the fact Jesus wasn't crucified. In his Trallians, Ignatius, the bishop ofAntioch (who died around 110 CE, and who wrote during the first decade of the second century CE), was quite eloquent in his attack against the early Christians who denied that the crucifixion of Jesus was anything more than an illusion. The following quotation from Ignatius (italics added for emphasis by the present author) is directly to the point: But if, as some say.. .his suffering was only an appearance, then why am I a prisoner, and why do I long to fight with the wild beasts? In that case, I am dying in vain." 80 The Cross & The Crescent One cannot attack as heresy a belief or doctrine that does not yet exist. The theology of Ignatius not withstanding, his attack against those early Christians who believed that Jesus' crucifixion was only illusory, demonstrates the existence of that belief among the early Christians. Further, the fact that Ignatius even bothered to attack this doctrine suggests that the belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was quite widespread by 110 CEo Clearly, the doctrine of or belief in the illusory nature of the crucifixion was perceived by Ignatius to be a threat to what would much later become the orthodox position of the Christian church regarding the crucifixion. As it would take some years for such a belief to become widespread across the vastness of the Roman Empire, it can be deduced that the origin of the doctrine of the illusory nature of the crucifixion must be dated well back into the first century CE, and quite possibly right back to the time of the crucifixion itself. When considering the above, it must be remembered that Ignatius was attacking Christians, not non-Christians, although the particular Christians being attacked shared a specific belief system at odds with that of Ignatius when it came to the particulars of the doctrine of the crucifixion. To millions of Christians raised with a Sunday School interpretation of Christianity, the above may come as something of a shock. However, for those Christians, the shocks are only just the beginning. Indeed, the shocks dramatically increase in voltage when one considers the early Christian scriptures, both apocryphal and canonical. ,,,,,
    1
  1530. Psalm 91 is about Jesus, he is mentioned by name in the original language, so we cant deny its about Jesus. This prophecy that Jesus would be protected, and be lifted with no crucifixion matches what the Qur'an says about Jesus PBUH GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3). GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4). Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5). Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8). No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion). GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children). His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12). "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death. Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt..,.,,,
    1
  1531. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,,,,
    1
  1532. I and my father are one. John 10.30....that they may all be one, just as you, father are in me, and I in you, that they may also be in us....The glory that you have given me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as we are one. John 17:20 So are the disciples also God? Because they are one with Jesus and God just as Jesus and God are one? Obviously not. So John 10.30 is not a literal one, but a metaphorical one. When cherry picking goes wrong. Thats why you should read the bible, and not believe whatever church or people have taught you. Whoever has seen me has seen the father. John 14.9. You take it literally and use this as evidence Jesus is God. So that would literally mean Jesus is the Father! In the Christian Creed, is Jesus ever the father? NO. They are 2 separate entities. Jesus is not the father, and the father is not Jesus. So again, you cherry pick a metaphorical statement and claim its literal, but if you think it through you would realise the blunder. If it wasn't cherry picked and it was understood with context, and other verses in the Bible were read, you would see many verses along these lines, that are not literal but metaphorical. Besides, the Bible says no man can see God and live. Every prophet that came was the only way to God during their respective prophet hood. When Abraham had his time, the way to God was only through his teaching, when Moses was here, it was through him, likewise Jesus, likewise Muhammad. He is the last prophet bringing the final revelation from God, and our only way to God is now through his teachings. Before Abraham was, I am. First of all, its a mistranslation. But before we get to that, how is this saying he is God? Being before Abraham makes him God? If you had read and understood the context, you would have realised it was talking about God's foreknowledge. It is saying that the mission of Jesus was predestined before Abraham was on earth. Likewise Muhammad says that he was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay. We don't take that as evidence Muhammad was God! He was a man and prophet of God. The statement 'I am' is in many places in the Bible, the exact words as the above, but its translated as 'I am he', Paul says it, blind man says it, but only in John 8:48 its translated as "I am" copying the translation of the "I am" that was used from OT about the Almighty God. Instead of depending on mistranslation, ambiguous statements, interpolation and fraud, look at the clear cut unambiguous statements from Jesus, like John 17.3, where Jesus says the ONLY TRUE GOD IS THE FATHER, or John 20:17 where he tells us we have the same father as him, the same God as him. Please reflect and study the bible properly. Better yet, read a red letter bible, where the statements of Jesus are in red. See what Jesus says, and not what others have said, and if you are sincere, it will rock your world. Sincerely as the God of Jesus to guide you 🙏,,
    1
  1533. That Isaiah 9:6 has been misinterpreted can be seen from the fact that Jesus is never called the “Eternal Father” anywhere else in Bible.  Since the Trinitarian doctrine teaches that Christians should “neither confound the Persons nor divide the Substance” (Athanasian Creed), how can the Trinitarians accept that Jesus is the “Eternal Father”? Let us consider additional facts impartially. First, all the Hebrew verb forms in Isaiah 9:6 are in the past tense.  For example, the word which the Christian Bibles render as “his name will be called” is the two words ‘vayikra shemo,’ which properly translated, should read “his name was called.”  The word “vayikra” is the first word to appear in the book of Leviticus (1:1), and it is translated properly over there – in the past tense.  In addition, the King James Version translates the same verbs elsewhere in the past tense in Genesis 4:26 and Isaiah 5:25.  Only in Isaiah 9:6-7 are these verbs translated in the future tense! Notice that it says “a child HAS been born to us.”  This is an event that has just occurred, not a future event.  Isaiah is not making a prophecy, but recounting history.  A future event would say a child will be born to us, but this is NOT what the verse says.  The Christian translations capitalize the word ‘son’ assuming that this is a messianic prophecy and the names of a divine son. Second, the two letter word “is”, is usually not stated in Hebrew.  Rather, “is” is understood.  For example, the words “hakelev” (the dog) and “gadol” (big), when joined into a sentence - hakelev gadol - means “the dog IS big,” even though no Hebrew word in that sentence represents the word “is.”  A more accurate translation of the name of that child, then, would be “A wonderful counselor is the mighty God, the everlasting father ...”.  This name describes God, not the person who carries the name.  The name Isaiah itself means “God is salvation,” but no one believes the prophet himself is God in a human body! Third, the phrase “Mighty God” is a poor translation according to some biblical scholars.  Although English makes a clear distinction between “God” and “god,” the Hebrew language, which has only capital letters, cannot.  The Hebrew word “God” had a much wider range of application than it does in English.  Some suggest a better translation for the English reader would be “mighty hero,” or “divine hero.”  Both Martin Luther and James Moffatt translated the phrase as “divine hero” in their Bibles. Fourth, according to the New Testament, Jesus was never called any of these names in his lifetime. Fifth, if Isaiah 9:6 is taken to refer to Jesus, then Jesus is the Father!  And this is against the Trinitarian doctrine. Sixth, the fact that the New Testament does not quote this passage shows that even the New Testament authors didn’t take this verse to be in reference to Jesus. Seventh, the passage is talking about the wonders performed by the Lord for Hezekiah, king of Judah.  Preceding verses in Isaiah 9 talk of a great military triumph by Israel over its enemies.  At the time Isaiah is said to have written this passage, God had just delivered King Hezekiah and Jerusalem from a siege laid by the Assyrians under General Sennacherib.  The deliverance is said to have been accomplished in spectacular fashion: an angel went into the Assyrian camp and cild 185,000 soldiers while they slept.  When Sennacherib awoke to find his army decimated, he and the remaining soldiers fled, where he was cild by his own sons (Isaiah 37:36-38).  Chapters 36 and 37 of Isaiah recount how Hezekiah stood firm in the face of Sennacherib’s vast army and his blasphemous words against the God.  When all seemed lost, Hezekiah continued to trust in the Lord, and for this he was rewarded with a miraculous victory.  It is interesting to note that the statement, “the zeal of the Lord of hosts will accomplish this,” found at the end of Isaiah 9:7, is found in only two other places in the Bible: Isaiah 37:32 and 2 Kings 19:31.  Both these passages discuss the miraculous deliverance of Hezekiah by God.  Therefore, in light of the above, Isaiah is recounting God’s defense of Jerusalem during the Assyrian siege.  Furthermore, Soncino’s commentary says the chapter is about the fall of Assyria and the announcement of the birth of Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz.,..,
    1
  1534. Before Abraham was, I am . Christians argue that this verse states that Jesus said he was the “I am” (i.e., the Yahweh of the Old Testament), so he must be God. That argument is not correct. Saying “I am” does not make a person God. The man born blind that Jesus healed was not claiming to be God, and he said “I am the man,” and the Greek reads exactly like Jesus’ statement, i.e., “I am.” The fact that the exact same phrase is translated two different ways, one as “I am” and the other as “I am the man,” is one reason it is so hard for the average Christian to get the truth from just reading the Bible as it has been translated into English. Most Bible translators are Trinitarian, and their bias appears in various places in their translation, this being a common one. Paul also used the same phrase of himself when he said that he wished all men were as “I am.” (Acts 26:29). Thus, we conclude that saying “I am” did not make Paul, the man born blind or Christ into God. C. K. Barrett writes: Ego eimi [“I am”] does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms. “I am the one—the one you must look at, and listen to, if you would know God.”  The phrase “I am” occurs many other times in the New Testament, and is often translated as “I am he”  or some equivalent (“I am he”—Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8; John 13:19; 18:5, 6 and 8. “It is I”—Matt. 14:27; Mark 6:50; John 6:20. “I am the one I claim to be” —John 8:24 and 28.). It is obvious that these translations are quite correct, and it is interesting that the phrase is translated as “I am” only in John 8:58. If the phrase in John 8:58 were translated “I am he” or “I am the one,” like all the others, it would be easier to see that Christ [‘Eesa alayhissalaam] was speaking of himself as the Messiah (Maseeh) of God (as indeed he was), spoken of throughout the Old Testament. The argument is made that because Jesus was “before” Abraham, Jesus must have been God. There is no question that Jesus figuratively “existed” in Abraham’s time. However, he did not actually physically exist as a person; rather he “existed” in the plan of God.  A careful reading of the context of the verse shows that Jesus was speaking of “existing” in God’s foreknowledge. Here is another example where a Prophet existed in the knowledge even before he was born, yet he was not at all Divine, Jeremiah 1:5 – Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, before you were born I set you apart, I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.” Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “I was a Prophet when Adam was between water and clay” Yet, no Muslim claims that the Prophet was divine, the meaning has it in it that even when Nabi Adam or Abraham (alayhimussalaam) were present, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were Decreed to be the Messiah and the Last Prophet in Allah’s plan respectively. Attaching ‘Divinity’ to such statements shall be absurd and meaningless. Many Christians use this verse to prove the existence of the Trinity. For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. (1 John 5:7) The issue with this verse is that it is universally recognized by Biblical scholars and historians, including thirty-two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, as being inserted by the Church later. Since it was proven that this verse is a fabrication, it has been deleted from some of the later Bibles, such as the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version. The authorship of the Gospel of John, the Fourth Gospel, is widely contested. Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment.,..,
    1
  1535. Jesus was accused of blasphemy, and he replied that you are called GODS in scripture, I am only saying son of God So Jesus denies the accusation against him. He denies he is claiming divinity. For example, I could be accused of murdering someone, and I reply, you people killed people, I just threw a punch. I'm really not sure why Christians use this accusation of the Jews as evidence Jesus was God. This verse further supports the fact Jesus was not God. As he denies the accusation and says his claim is not comparable to the accusation.,..,
    1
  1536. How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has? Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22. Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14. Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn" Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?). Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God" Luke 3:38. Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2 As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people. Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God ? Read Psalms 2:7 : "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee".,.,.,
    1
  1537. Let’s take the Gospel of John, the fourth Gospel. Is there good evidence to believe that what we read in John’s Gospel is a true account of what Jesus actually said and did? Up until a few hundred years ago, no-one really questioned whether John’s Gospel was historical. But with growing scepticism over the reality of God and the supernatural (a philosophical and cultural movement known as the Enlightenment), scholars began to suggest other explanations for the origins of the Gospel. Against the traditional view of the Gospel having been written by a disciple of Jesus and eyewitness to his life, death and resurrection, they argued that the Gospel was, in reality, written by someone living hundreds of years later, and hundreds of miles away. And the concepts in John, they said, were too Greek, and not Jewish enough (as the other three Gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, were). John’s idea that Jesus was ‘God in the flesh’, for example, was said to reflect much later developments in Christian theology. So for these reasons, by around 1900, most New Testament scholars believed that John’s Gospel could not be considered as reliable history.,..,
    1
  1538. Ttthe doctrine of Alpha and Omega is a sad and unfortunate example of mankind’s tampering with the Word of God. It shows how doctrine is contracted by men to justify false beliefs. The phrase “Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last” (Revelation 1:11) which is found in the King James Version was not in the original Greek texts. Therefore, the Alpha Omega phrase is not found in virtually any ancient texts, nor is it mentioned, even as a footnote, in any modern translation., This phrase does NOT occur in NA28, UBS5, W&H, Souter, Majority Text, THGNT, SBL, R&P Byzantine Text, Orthodox Text, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, & the Clementine Text. The phrase only occurs in the Textus Receptus. This phrase is not even footnoted in UBS5 and UBS4. The only MSS listed as having this phrase in NA28 is the manuscript of the commentary on Revelation by Andreas of Caesarea. However, "I [am] the first and the last" occurs in P025. Therefore, there appears to be very little dispute that "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" is not part of the original text of Revelation at Rev 1:11. in many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45.] John 7:53-8:11, often described as “The Passage of the Woman Caught in Adultery” (passage de adultera), is famous for several reasons. The pleasant reason is that it is one of the most dramatic displays of the grace of God in the Bible. But there is also a more difficult reason that needs to be addressed: this passage was likely not in the original version of the Gospel of John, but was added later at an undeterminable time and for an unknown reason. How should the church treat this passage? The text-critical evidence is overwhelming: this passage was almost certainly not in the original version of the Gospel of John. This is hardly an answer, however, but an entirely new question. For nearly every contemporary Bible, even if the text is given double-brackets or italicized or given a smaller font, contains this passage, thereby declaring to today’s reader that it is part of the Gospel of John..,.
    1
  1539. The Muslims are right, and they are the only ones who actually follow the message of Jesus. And that is why its the fastest growing religion by number of conversions, and most reverts come from xtianty. Jesus also prophesied of Muhammad to come, and lead us to ALL TRUTH. 12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. 15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you. There is no man in History that this verse applies to more than the final messenger Muhammad. Unfortunately for christians, this cannot be about the holy spirit as Jesus clearly says the comforter will not come until after he departs. And the holy spirit was already on earth at that point, e.g. at the baptism. Also no holy ghost has guided us to all truth and new teachings that we couldn't bare then. There are many sects of xrianty who claim they have the Spirit, and none of these sects can agree with each other, let alone guide to a new truth. The final messenger did not speak of his own, but what he heard from Angel Gabriel, he glorfied Jesus, and told us Jesus will return towards the end times to deal wit the anti christ. There is a whole chapter in the Qur'an dedicated to Mary and she is called the greatest woman of ALL time. He has led us to all truth, he received the final revelation from God. May peace be upon all the prophets of God..,,,
    1
  1540.  @SourdoughJesusFreak  I mean no offense I'm a little concerned by the amount of made up things I keep seeing by Christian channels, and going thru the comments are bad for our m.h. I have not made anything up above, nor have I quoted our ppl. I have quoted the bible, and xtian scholarship. The reason the world is out to get us, is cos its the fastest growin by number of reverts, and that's because when ppl learn the truth about it, they realise what's really going on in the world. From Adam, Abraham Moses Jesus and Muhammed, they were all sent with Islam. May peace be upon them.
    1
  1541.  @SourdoughJesusFreak  I haven't made anything up. We were told a time would come, when holding onto the truth would be like hot coals, as shayy. Tann would make the word such a place. And we are getting to that time. Ppl can keep d33. Money. Sing us, but we will hold on to this religion of Adam, Moses, Abraham Jesus and Muhammad even tighter. May peace be upon them all
    1
  1542. Not only is the great commission doctored, Matthew is written by yet another anonymous author, a ju who copied Mark
    1
  1543. The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: As to Matthew 28:19, it says: It is the central piece of evidence for the traditional (Trinitarian) view. If it were undisputed, this would, of course, be decisive, but its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism. The same Encyclopedia further states that: “The obvious explanation of the silence of the New Testament on the triune name, and the use of another (JESUS NAME) formula in Acts and Paul, is that this other formula was the earlier, and the triune formula is a later addition.”
    1
  1544. Edmund Schlink, The Doctrine of Baptism, page 28: “The baptismal command in its Matthew 28:19 form can not be the historical origin of Christian baptism. At the very least, it must be assumed that the text has been transmitted in a form expanded by the [Catholic] church.
    1
  1545. The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263: “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church in the second century.”
    1
  1546. The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275: “It is often affirmed that the words in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the ipsissima verba [exact words] of Jesus, but
a later liturgical addition.”
    1
  1547. According to early church tradition, originating with Papias of Hierapolis (c. 60–130 AD),[10] the gospel was written by Matthew the companion of Jesus, but this presents numerous problems.[9] Most modern scholars hold that it was written anonymously[8] in the last quarter of the first century by a male Jew who stood on the margin between traditional and nontraditional Jewish values and who was familiar with technical legal aspects of scripture being debated in his time
    1
  1548. In many places, the trinitaria scribes mistraslate. e.g. they translate words that mean 'revere' or 'homage' into worship. this is truly sad that they mislead many to eternal fiya Matthew 2:11 — The NRSV correctly reads “and they knelt down and paid him homage.” The NIV has the magi worship Jesus instead of merely paying homage, most likely reflecting the piety of the translators and their audience: “and they bowed down and worshipped him.” The NIV does, however, correctly translate the same word (proskuneƍ) as “pay homage” in Mark 15:19, where the soldiers pay mock homage to Jesus as king. [See BeDuhn, Truth in Translation, pp. 44–45
    1
  1549. Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12 Jesus criticizes the Jews for not kilng their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20:9, Dt 21:18-21) 7:9-10 Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15 John. Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14 Acts Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be kiled. 3:23 God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12 thessalonia,.,,...
    1
  1550. Luke 19:27 Jesus of the new testament... 27 But those e3n.mi3s of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and cw13ll them in front of me.’”
    1
  1551. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,
    1
  1552. The findings show that the Christian civilization was responsible for the largest amount of kiwiings in history! The results are as follows: 1. Christian Civilization - caused ca 236 million 2. Antitheist Civilization(former Communist Block) - caused ca 124 million 3. Sinic Civilization (East Asian) - caused ca 107 million 4. Buddhist Civilization - caused ca 87 million 5. Primal Indigenous Civilization - caused ca 45 million 6. Islamic Civilization - caused ca 31 million,.,,,,.,.,.,,.
    1
  1553. whilst Islam teaches that even in woah, innocent. đŸ§”â€â™‚đŸ‘©đŸ‘ŽđŸ‘”đŸ™…â€â™€đŸ™…â€â™‚ đŸ‘¶ 🌮 â›Ș are not to be touched and if they are we would go to đŸ”„.,,.,.,.,.,,.,,........
    1
  1554. the reason paulanity is at the top and islam is at the bottom of the above list is cos in the bible, it teaches that all of the above were to be un ali8ed. ,.,,..
    1
  1555. in Islam, we r to love our neighbour as ourselves whatever relgion they were. thats why when Islam expanded, they allowed everyone to practice their own religion, with their own courts etc. the only conditon was that they paid income tax. this tax was only upon men, of those only who could afford it. no elderly, women, were reruired to pay, and they wer exempt from militry duties. whilst upon the muslims, zakat which is higher than the tax the non muslims paid, was upon men and women, and they had to do milit duties. they did not force their relig onto others, and therefore didnt impoze zakat on them. this is why when ch3wz were bein purse. cute. ted around europe, by the paul followers, they ran to muslm lands for safety.... these r facts. any1 can luk it up. whilst when paulanity x. p4nd3d, it literally unn. 47ibed everyone who dint blieve. and thats why you see the huge diff in numbers above. the oldest churches in the wrld are in muz lands. there are 10ml christians in egypt..,,.,......
    1
  1556. And it's all in the scriptures. They will cherry pick from the Qur'an and present verses that were revealed during w04h, against ppl who had broken treaties, and then even being given 4 months to leave, and if they didn't, then they were to be tacked. And during this, if any of them were to ask for mercy, they were Commandd to take those ppl to safety and protect them. Meanwhile to this day, jelly. Slides are being kmitted and they r quiting the bible verbatim, to justify why they un. Alibe. .....đŸ‘¶.,,.
    1
  1557. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well......
    1
  1558. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12.....
    1
  1559. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  1560. Now kewl all the 👩and all the đŸ‘©who have 😮with a 🧔‍♀. Only the young👧who are Fur. Gin may live; you may keep them for yourselves..,
    1
  1561. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  1562. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!
    1
  1563. as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. 👧 Who have yet to gnow a 👹 The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame
    1
  1564. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....
    1
  1565. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,..
    1
  1566. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12......,
    1
  1567. The God of the Bible, JESUS, THEY SAY explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations.
    1
  1568. Deut 2two. If a man is caught in the act of r8ink a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violin.lated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. What kind of God would make a r8 biktim marry her atcker? Answer: Jesus of the bible.
    1
  1569. When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT) So these are the Bible family values! A man can buy as many sex slaves as he wants as long as he feeds them, clothes them, and has sex with them!
    1
  1570. as you can see above Jesus who they claim was always God, doesn't do marriage, or wait til pew Betty He say to unm.alive bay. Bee's. Except the lil. Who have yet to gnow a The morals between paulanity and Islam are a world apart If our God taught this, I would hide in shame
    1
  1571. No one who reads through the Bible can ignore the blatant misogyny and barbarity toward women. There are examples of sexism toward women in both the Old and New Testament, and Christians today still use those scriptures to oppress women.
    1
  1572. The God of the Bible, Jesus they say, explicitly endorses polygamy and sexual slavery and coerced marriage of Fur. Gin along with monogamy. In fact, he endorses all three to the point of providing detailed regulations..
    1
  1573. Sadly only Muslims accept the teachings Jesus bought. We will keep trying, to show them there was no mystery to Jesus, his teachings were clear cut and unambiguous. The same message every prophet before and after Jesus bought. They were the ONLY WAY to God, during their respective ministries. And by following their teachings, one could be saved. Jesus, who insisted he was sent ONLY FOR THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL, when asked what was required for salvation, said to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. When disciples wanted to go to the gentiles, he forbid them, and reminded them he was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of Israel. This was always the way to God. God says in the o.t. that he hates original sin because its UNJUST, and says even the wickedest of the wicked can be saved by repentance and good works, exekiel 18. 20 This obviously completely contradicts paulanity, where Paul taught that the only way to be saved was from the death of Jesus. Something Jesus never ever said. Many xtians don't know that Paul never met Jesus, and taught opposite what Jesus taught. Jesus said not one dot of the law shall be changed until heaven and earth pass away. Paul came along after Jesus and said Jesus told him in a dream that we can do away with the law because Jesus died for our sins. When he bought these teachings to the disciples they were irate, as they walked with Jesus and knew him better and Jesus kept the commandments with the disciples. Unfortunately most xtians havent read the bible, let alone the history of the Gospels. They think the disciples wrote the Gospels 😅 Their own scholars say the authors are anonymous, and most definitely not the disciples, who were unlettered uneducated fisherman. They did not know how to write Greek. The Qur'an says scripture was given to Moses and Jesus but man has written much and attributed to God, so we are to use the Qur’an to filter truth from falsehood in the previous scriptures and bring the people of the book back to their creator. So there are some parts of the bible we can accept, e.g. John 17.3, or where Jesus was asked what to do for salvation, and Jesus told him to keep the commandments, most importantly that OUR lord God is ONE. He didn't say that he would die for sins and believing that he died would save us! It's no coincidence, when they try to prove they have the truth, they mostly point to the works of false prophet Paul, or the multi authored Gospel of John, written hundreds of miles away and after Jesus time. And this is the Gospel that turns Jesus to a God. The real problem is the masses have been lied to and deceived about Islam for soo long. But now, in this technological era, its much harder for them to keep fooling the people. And it's inevitable, when sincere people learn about Islam, they accept, as Allah said, truth is easily distinguished from falsehood. Islam is nothing to be afraid of, its simply the submission of one's will to their creator. The religion of Adam, to Muhammad. It's is pure monotheism, the way every prophet taught. There is only One God with no partners. The desperate xtians and haters have painted Islam as a war mongering woman oppressing religion. The biggest criticisms are the fact prophet Muhammad was polygamous. The Arabs at the time didn't not treat woman humanely, they were burying baby daughters at birth, had TENS of wives, and worshipped idols. Muhammed through revelation, reduced the number of wives to max 4. These woman had better chance of being treated justly. So Islam reduced the number of wives, but if you listen to the haters,....Islam is bad because it let's you have 4 wives đŸ€Š All but one of his wives were divorced or widowed and such a state made it hard to get remarried. It was compassionate to marry such woman. In the Bible, many prophets were polygamous, and there are instructions to be fair to your wives when you marry more than one. Deuteronomy 21.15 Then they say Muhammad was a pedo and he raped children. The girl in question, Aisha, was already engaged to someone else, but her father married her to Muhammad, who was his best friend, and he wanted for his daughter to marry the prophet, who wouldn't. Muhammad wasn't lusting after her, as liars say. This was an arranged marriage, and was only consumated 3 yrs later after she had entered puberty. Marriage at this age was the norm of the time, and this marr8age was never a criticism until last century. Only a few centuries ago, people were married even at 7 in the UK and USA. Bible historians put Mary as 12 and her husband as 90. Xtians believe Jesus was always God, so authored the bible, where he commands kilin whole families including babies except the lil virgin girls, to be kept as sex slaves. So what's worse? Killing families and keeping only the virgin girls, or Muhammad arranged marriage chosen by God, and as we see, Aisha is the greatest scholar in Islam. Then they see he was a war monger. More lies. His wars were in self defence versus the oppressors. And the rules of war were beautiful. No non combatants, woman, children, nor elderly or religious leaders, no building tress or animals. And if the oppressors surrendered, they were to be shown mercy. When we contrast this with the teachings of Jesus in the bible, woman, babies even donkeys were to be destroyed in war. When you look past all the lies and hate, what you see is the messenger sent for mankind, the final messenger, a mercy to mankind with the final revelation and our only WAY TO GOD NOW. Unlike the other prophets, who were sent only to their people, Muhammad was sent for mankind. When you learn the truth about him, you will realise. Jesus also told you the spirit of truth, the comforter would lead us to all truth. May peace be upon all the prophets of God
    1
  1574. A prophet is someone SENT by God, God is not a prophet by definition, they are mutually exclusive. If this man was GOD, he would never have claimed to be a prophet or called a prophet by those who saw him. Matthew 21:11 And the crowds were saying, “This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” Luke 7:16 Fear gripped them all, and they began glorifying God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” John 4:19 The woman *said to Him, “Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Matthew 21:46 When they sought to seize Him, they feared the people, because they considered Him to be a prophet. John 6:14 Therefore when the people saw the sign which He had performed, they said, “This is truly the Prophet who is to come into the world.” John 7:40 Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” John 9:17 So they *said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.” Luke 24:19 And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, Mark 6:15 But others were saying, “He is Elijah.” And others were saying, “He is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old.” Mark 8:28 They told Him, saying, “John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.” Luke 9:8 and by some that Elijah had appeared, and by others that one of the prophets of old had risen again. OK, so Jesus doesnt refute anybody calling him a Prophet, he reaffirms it😇 Luke 13:33 . . . . I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be kwil. Led except in Jerusalem. Mark 6:3-4 Then they scoffed . . . . They were deeply off. nded and refused to believe in him. Then Jesus told them, “A prophet is honored everywhere except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family”. In the above two verses, Jesus called himself a prophet. There are also many verses indicating that during his lifetime on earth the people in Judea and Galilee regarded him as a prophet. Regarding the verses in which Jesus says that he is equal to God (mainly in the Gospel of John) most scholars believe that Jesus never said that. It was what people started saying about him after his deaff and put on his lips in the Gospels written at least 4 decades later.,
    1
  1575. Jesus Christ not God. It is clear from the verses below that he was indeed 100% man. John 17.3...jesus says to the father...that they may know you, THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus whom you sent. John 20.17 Jesus says....I am ascending to my father and your father, my God and your God. Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man
 Numbers 23:19 (NRSV) God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal
 Hosea 11:9 For I am God, and not man— the Holy One among you..
    1
  1576. So did Jesus' earliest followers consider him to be God? EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God. The way it works is that you do find Jesus calling himself God in the Gospel of John, our last Gospel. Jesus says things like: Before Abraham was, I am, and I and the father are one, and if you've seen me, you've see the father. These are all statements that you find only in the Gospel of John, and that's striking because we have earlier Gospels, and we have the writings of Paul, and in none of them is there any indication that Jesus said such things about him. I think it's completely implausible that Matthew, Mark and Luke would not mention that Jesus called himself God if that's what he was declaring about himself. That would be a rather important point to make. So this is not an unusual view among scholars. It's simply the view that the Gospel of John is providing a theological understand of Jesus that is not what was historically accurate. GROSS: Jesus was referred to as the king of the Jews. Did he call himself that, and what did that mean it is time? Do we know? Can we have any idea what that meant in its time? EHRMAN: Yeah, we do know, and actually to be a king of the Jews simply meant literally, being the king over Israel. It is a very difficult question to get to, what Jesus taught about himself because of the nature of our gospels, but one thing is relatively certain, that that the reason the Romans crucified Jesus was precisely because he was calling himself the king of Israel. Now, Jesus obviously was not the king. So what might he have meant by it? Well, what scholars have long thought is that Jesus was talking about not being put on the throne by means of some kind of political show of power, but that Jesus thought the world as he knew it was coming to an end and God was going to bring in a kingdom, a new kingdom in which there would be no more injustice or oppression or poverty or suffering of any kind. And in this kingdom, Jesus appears to have thought that he himself would be the future king. And so Jesus meant this not in the regular political sense but in a kind of apocalyptic sense, that at the end of the age, this is what was going to happen: he was going to be installed as king. GROSS: So Jesus saw himself as the messiah. What else did that mean in its time? EHRMAN: Well, a lot of Christians today have a wrong idea about what the messiah was supposed to be. The word messiah is a Hebrew word that literally means the anointed one. This was used in reference to the kings of Israel. The ancient kings of Israel, when they became king during the coronation ceremony, would have oil poured on their head as a sign of divine favor. And so the king of Israel was called God's anointed one, the messiah. There came a point at which there was no longer a king ruling Israel, and some Jewish thinkers began to maintain that there would be a future king of Israel, a future anointed one, and they called that one the messiah. And so the messiah for most Jews simply referred to the future king of Israel. And so when Jesus told his disciples that he himself was the messiah, he was saying that in the future, when God establishes the kingdom once more, I myself will be the king of that kingdom. And so it's not that the messiah was supposed to be God. The messiah was not supposed to be God. The messiah was a human being who would be the future king, and that's probably what Jesus taught his disciples that he was
    1
  1577. Christianity is sadly one of the greatest tricks the devil pulled on mankind. God sent tonnes of prophets with the message to worship God alone, and this is exactly what Jesus preached. This message was twisted by man and now Christians worship Jesus and forget God altogether đŸ€Ż Its shocking! Jesus never preached he was God and he would die for your sins, rather he taught to pray to the Father alone and seek forgiveness. There is clear unambiguous evidence in the Bible that clearly shows Jesus came to reaffirm the laws and was a man anointed by God. The only Gospel that inclines towards Jesus divinity, was in the later Gospel of John, which scholars say is clearly written by someone other than the other Gospel. And then you have Paul.  A man who never met Jesus. Jesus said hes here to reaffirm the laws, he said the father is greater than all, he said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God ( john 20.17 ). He says that they may know you, the ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus who u sent (John 17.3) He said to direct worship only to the Father. Paul said to do away with the law. He said Jesus is equal to God. He said to pray to Jesus. How mind-boggling that Christians disobey Jesus and obey Paul. Thats why your considered followers of Paul, not Jesus. The only evidence of a trinity is an interpolation and removed from modern translationsby. John 1.5.7 The only verses xtians use to support their position are ambiguous verses, mostly from the revelations of John. Now this is striking, because the core tenants of your salvation, trinity, dying for our sins and divinty should be crystal clear and all over the bible, but its nowhere. You reach hard to mistranslate verses which shouldn't be the case. That message would be clear if that was indeed what Jesus taught. Despite the clear evidence, and the absurdity of original sin (bible says each is responsible for their own deeds and son doesn't bare the iniquity of the father) and the joke that God cannot forgive, and needs a blood payment from an innocent soul, so he came to earth, to kill himself to save humanity from himself đŸ„Ž, ppl remain arrogant and ignorant. Believing Jesus died for your sins, you are saved, as an innocent paid for your sins, is truly unjust. There's no way that is Gods justice as he is most Just. And this belief contradicts the bible. Jesus said he goes to his father and our father, his God and our God. He says referring to God, that he is the ONLY true God. Muslims are true followers of Jesus PBUH. We can be saved by gods mercy, and we are responsible and accountable for our own deeds. If we sin against God, we ask him to forgive, and he is most forgiving, he doesn't need a payment. if we sin against man, we need to reconcile with man, my good deeds won't negate my sins against fellow man. So if I murder someone, the victims family can seek revenge, eye for an eye, compensation, or to forgive. This is real justice. If we read the bible sincerely, and believe Jesus was always God, then he authored and instructed killing babies, revenge rape, taking virgin girls as sex slaves, beating slaves to death as its one's property, incest, etc, you know God would never produce such filth. Xtians cop out of this saying that Jesus bought new testament, but he was always God. Or they say the old testament was for Jews? So then gods morality changes? There was a time when rape and revenge was allowed and God changed his mind? The holes in xtianity make it easy to tear this falsehood down with ease, and that's because its falsehood. Most Christians haven't even read the bible and just belive what the church teaches them, but they are mislead. People need to go back to Jesus true message, God is 1, not 3 in 1, not Jesus, but the one true God. Jesus's God and our God..,.,
    1
  1578. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13...,,.
    1
  1579. saiah 6:7-8 He touched my lips with the burning coal and said, “This has touched your lips, and now your guilt is gone, and your sins are forgiven.
    1
  1580. Christianity’s holiest site is Jerusalem’s Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The Church marks the site where Christians falsely believe that Jesus was cruse. sified, burrd, and rose from the dw34d. The Church contains the “Stone of Unction.” It is believed that Jesus’s body was laid on this stone while being prepared for burial. Christians make pilgrimage to the Church and ritually kiss the Stone of Unction, owing to its perceived connection with God (i.e., Jesus)
    1
  1581. This false bishop spends a lot of time making things up about Islam. He's not really a decent person, but he shud not have been tacked. A sheik more well known, in you ess, same happened to him, by a grown xtian man, but it wasn't covered because they want to paint a picture
    1
  1582. What about “The Woman Caught in Adultery”? Looking back at John 7:53-8:11, it is clear this story was not in John’s original gospel. Your Bible likely has brackets around this story with a note that says something like “The earliest manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11.” This is because the only manuscript before the ninth century to include this story was one from the fifth century found in western Europe (further from where John wrote) and also deviates from earlier manuscripts in other key areas. Other copies from the tenth century onward that have it, often place it, or variations of it, in different places throughout the gospels. It only became more common in its current form and location in manuscripts dating from the Middle Ages. On the other hand, every other early manuscript omits it, notably including two of the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, called Papyrus 66 and Papyrus 75 that date from the second or early third century and were found in Egypt (closer to where John wrote). Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest complete copy of the New Testament (c. 325 CE), does not include it either. No pastor or theologian from the eastern side of the early church references it until the tenth century. In their commentaries and sermons, they go directly from John 7:52 to 8:12 (keep in mind that current chapter and verse breakdowns were added later). Finally, all the earliest translations of the Greek New Testament (Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Old Latin, and Georgian) skip this story as well.....
    1
  1583. Cor Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? John one.nine/ Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works. cil Followers of Other Religions “If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kcil him. Your hand shall be the first raised to zlay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to dev, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slvry. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such 3vi7 as this in your midst.” (Deut13..,.....,
    1
  1584. You would think that Jesus and the New Testament would have a different view of slavery, but slavery is still approved of in the New Testament, as the following passages show. Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephes 6:5 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Tim 6:1-2 NLT) In the following parable, Jesus clearly approves of bee. ting slaves even if they didn’t know they were doing anything wrong. The servant will be sevrely punn. ished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12....
    1