₦airaland Forum

Seun, good one - but crooks masquerading as "pastors" have no respect for IOUs. To them, it's more akin to "[b]I[/b]n [b]O[/b]pposite [b]U[/b]nderstanding" which betrays trusts, and nothing more.

Sorry to read about your plight, cino1. What can I say? God help you recover and see better days than the sad experience.

@olabowale,

It isn't late for any man still breathing and alive - unless you make it "too, too and very very absolutely very late" for yourself, and still be liking it like that.

We as Christians do not bow to any creature or creation - and we have consistently shown from the Bible and the Biblical prophets that the Qur'an acknowledges, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Unless you deny what the Qura'n said about the Psalms of David and still "like it like that" in your denial, you're not in a comfort zone - so take care and do the only right thing a sane man would do: trust in the Son - just as Psalm 2:12 says.

You have nowhere addressed the points I raised about the angels who compared themselves to the Creator in the Qur'an. So, if those angels were claiming to have done the same work of creating man, as I referenced earlier (Q.15:26 - "We created man from sounding clay", those angels were claiming the same thing the Qur'an forbids - joining associates with God. They are creations of God; so by accepting and buying into Muhammad's tales, you're making a big mistake by bowing to these same creatures who have declared to be your creator[b]s[/b] and pretending to be *Allah*! I hope you don't still "like it like that" when you read what those 'angels' have said in that verse.

No angel is worthy to take the place of the Creator, or to claim the same majesty and work of the Creator. Jesus is the very Word of God through whom all things were created. For the Bible testifies of this when it said: "All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made" (John 1:3). That is because in the OT prophecy, Isaiah called Him the Mighty God (Isaiah 9:6).

Jesus is not a creation - He is the very Creator of the ends of the earth. That's why we praise Him and bow to Him; for "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phillipians 2:10-11).

It's not "too, too and very very absolutely very late" for you - while you still breathe and live, you can know the wonderful love of God by faith in Jesus Christ. That's what Psalm 2:12 says - "trust in Him." Will you do it today??

Blessings.

I was outa the Forum a moment ago because my break at lunch time from work was over. But a quick one here as my colleagues in the office who are reading as well have called my attention to a line Olabowale's:

olabowale:
If you continuw to insult a woman, then where is your manhood. Yet your christian brother is eager for fornication, which is against Islam. I hope it is against yours as well.

To be sure, fornication is a heinous sin in the Bible; but how my earlier greeting to mukina2 translates into "fornication" by Islamic standards really beats me. Please be reminded that the same mukina2 acknowledged my greeting elsewhere without so much as a hint of suggestive motives tending to your insinuations. This is what she said: "4getme hmm no comment its true", and you can read it here by clicking on this link. Nowhere did she suggest that I was soliciting for fornication from or with her. Haba!! Uncle Olabowale, wetin we go do naw. . .?? Make I run from your next fatwa?  

Besides, I'm happily married - and my wife sent me a text a while ago to laugh at my joke with mukina2. Where is your mind, bigger bros??  

@michy, you rock!!

Second appeal @Seun: is there a way that you could upgrade the emoticons to include some winks? I think Mukina2 wants us to confirm whether we are cowards or liars (whichever applies) as men, by winking with our eyes. (Now, I wonder what applies to women - esp babes as young as muki-babe ). Let me see: a philosopher once said that men will resort to lies as a last resort; but with women, a lie is first-aid. So, give us some 'plaster emoticons' as well, you hear me?? Enjoy!!

Thank you - God has been faithful. Bless you, too.

Uh-oh!! I'm outa here for the mo.


Psst: Muki-babe, how bodi??  


Seun: is there a way that you could upgrade the emoticons to include some winks? I think Mukina2 wants us to confirm whether we are cowards or liars (whichever applies) as men, by winking with our eyes. (Now, I wonder what applies to women - esp babes as young as muki-babe   ). Let me see: a philosopher once said that men will resort to lies as a last resort; but with women, a lie is first-aid. So, give us some 'plaster emoticons' as well, you hear me?? Enjoy!!    

@olabowale,

Now this makes my day!! Thank you so much in reminding me to pity my ignorance as you pity yours.

The fact is this: is it not by seniority of Ishmael over Isaac that God called people to salvation. "Salvation is of the Jews" - so said Jesus (John 4:22) and all the prophets agree, because God had told Abraham long before that : "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice" (Gen. 22:18). Remember also that God had said to Abraham - "for in Isaac shall thy seed be called" (Gen. 21:12), and not in Ishmael. So, Jesus Christ descended from the lineage of Isaac, and not from Ishmael. Remember also that Ishmael's mother was an Egyptian slave/maid, and Isaac could not claim to have been an Egyptian.

I like your last line:

olabowale:
You will find out who is telling the truth in the day of Judgement. unfortunately, for the liars, it will be too late.

That's true - too late it will be for those who deny what the Bible has said about Jesus: His divine Sonship (read the Psalms which the Qur'an proclaims came from *Allah*, especially Psalm 2:12), His crucifixion (Psalm 22:14 & 16), His resurrection, His life and ministry in the Gospels - and discover the truth today for yourself!! Don't wait until it is too late on Judgement Day!! God bless.

Enjoy!

Havila:
God bless you and hope your understanding is enriched.

Double blessings - my understanding has increased OO!!  

In my "clean" corporate suits, I was walking around on the inside as one of those "dirty smelling, homeless, sick, drunk man". . . until Jesus came into my heart and made the difference. No, I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ that gave me what no man could ever give me; so I don't hesitate to acknowledge that I was a dirty sinner, but now have found grace by faith in Jesus Christ.

"And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor. 6:11).

Glory to God!!  

@Olabowale,

Interestingly, I've just posted a rejoinder in another thread (Jehovah Or Yahweh Is Not The Same As Allah) to show that the *Allah* of the Qur'an is not the God of the Bible. I'm sorry, but this is not to deliberately offend you; rather, when all things are considered, you'll find it so, and this is the reason why I often now type "Allah" in asterix (**) to distinguish what I'm trying to point out.

At the end of the day, Muslims may praise *Allah* even in political arena, and politicians today will not want to allow the same 'freedom' to Christian beliefs and convictions. In the same United States of America where you presently reside, what segment of society in that country have been most politically opposed to Christians and the Church? Refresh your memory that not long ago, the debate against the Ten Commandments were politically motivated. However, your surmation actually does not lend weight at all to the notion that Islam must be the way to God simply because Muslims praise *Allah* on the floor of the United Nations.

If you have read the Bible, you would see that Jesus came with a timeless message - offering Himself for the salvation of the world, according to the prophecies of the OT prophets. "God so loved the world," not just the Jews (John 3:16) - and that was Jesus' own statement, where again in that text He said that "whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life."

Muhammad's claim to have been sent to all the world is weakened by the very same prophecies that the Qur'an endorsed, particularly the Psalms of David. I have time and again made reference to what the Qur'an says about the Psalms; it's up to my Muslim friends to either deny what the Qur'an says (because that is a hard pill to swallow); or to acknowledge the Psalms and investigate the Crucifixion and divine Sonship of Jesus Christ.

olabowale:
There was atime in existence that jesus never was. Infact Jesus soul was taken out of the back of Adam (AS), at the same time the souls of every man, inclusing the not yet born was taken.

Do Muslims really believe in all the Biblical prophets as the Qur'an says in Sura 2.136? - - 'Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam)." '

If you really believe in all the prophets of the Bible, then you will understand that Jesus was not created by God; but being God Himself, He existed long before He was born. See Micah 5:2 in the Old Testament - "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." There again, Muhammad in the Qur'an would not have made any reference to Micah a confirmed Old Testament prophet - and for good reasons, because it states what Muhammad and *Allah* deny in the Qur'an.

olabowale:
In this command of 'BE', the thing that is commanded to be created begins to take form, until its full completion. The voice of God is audible, to those intended receiver who are being instructed. Moses heard God voice.

It is remarkable that Moses and other Biblical prophets heard the voice of God (as is alluded in the Qur'an about Moses in Q.4.164 -- "Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct;-"; but the great prophet Muhammad who claimed to have come from that same God did not hear His voice, but only got his revelations from "angels". Does that not make you think deeply about Muhammad's claims of having been sent by the God of the Biblical prophets?

olabowale:
Jesus (AS), was seen by his followers and people of his time. Jesus (AS) ate and carried on activities and functions of mere mortals. Jesus was a sign of the might of God. Just in the same way you and me and all God's creations are.

I think you're beginning to lose the plot, dear friend. If Jesus was a sign of the might of God in just the same way you and me and all God's creations are, how come Muhammad couldn't do the same things Jesus accomplished, which the Qur'an even acknowledges - His miracles and powerful works?

olabowale:
God and Jesus are not the same.

Oh, really?? Then I guess you would have had to say it to His face the very day He stated that: "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30). He also said this: "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work" (John 5:17). What Muhammad could not accept, he denied. Don't make that mistake, because the very same Qur'an you read show that in endorsing the Biblical prophets, it was actually endorsing what they taught. Again, remember that very prophet - Isaiah - that Muhammad failed to mention?? This is what he called the Messiah in prophecy - "his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6).

olabowale:
God is so unique that He declares His uniqueness in the 112 Chapter of the Qur'an. You have never seen anything compared to Him.

The uniqueness of God - ah, that's something I may agree with you on. 

However, I'm sad to notice that the very angels speaking to Muhammad in revelation have often tried to compare themselves with *Allah* when they claimed to have done the same work of creating man. Let me quote just two of them:

Q.15:26 - "We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape."

Q.19:67 - "But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?"

So, who is the Creator - who created man: was it *Allah* alone; or those angels who associated and compared themselves to the Creator be claiming what they did not do? This is a dilemma for many Muslims, and the earlier they come to their senses about these issues, the better for them.

olabowale:
If you believe that God is Jesus, you have transgressed all bounds. You should return back to your senses. Ask God for forgiveness. Follow the path of salvation in religion. The path that is direct to God's Mercy. For God is the Owner of true Mercy. No one else.

I cannot deny what the Bible states about who Jesus is; and if the Qur'an endorses the Biblical prophets and the Psalms of David, then there is no crime in believing that the Bible is true in what it declares about Jesus Christ. God in His true mercy has sent His own Son Jesus Christ for the salvation of our souls. This is what the very same prophets of the Bible proclaimed; and if you deny that, then you're denying what the Qur'an said about the Psalms and all the prophets - and you'll be making the same grave error that Muhammaed made - denying the true revelation of God in all the prophets that could have saved his own soul. Don't make that mistake, dear friend.

Let me remind you again about the Son of God in Psalm 2:12: "Kiss the Son, . . . Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him." It's either we trust in Him, Jesus Christ the Son as the Psalms say; or my dear Muslim friends should surprise us by denying the Qur'an ever endorsed the Psalms. You can't have it both ways. Jesus Christ is "the Son" in the Psalms that the Qur'an claimed came from *Allah* upon David.

Which shall it be - deny the Qur'an by denying the Psalms; or accept what the Qur'an said about the Psalms by believing Psalm 2:12??

May God in His mercy help you out of the mistake Muhammad made. Regards.

In retrospect, I think we're saying the same thing. . .lol. No mind me o jare - my colleagues in the office are reading as well, and my attention has been called to this line in yours:

mrmayor:
Neither is Chukwu,Obasi,Chineke etc,if these names are not in the bible they can't be the same,thats using your logic.

Bros, no vex.

Enjoy.

I'm sorry to disappoint you, mymayor - first because I didn't see my inputs as mere "logic". When you point out an issue from Scripture, that is not mere "logic" as you put it (even though I have no qualms about anyone's use of it).

However, I'm not so sure where you get you ideas from. How did Christianity reach African converts to Christianity if the concept of the "Son of God" was alien to them? An what you mean by the an African equivalent of the name Jesus is a bit quizzical. Try "Jesu" for a start; and whatever else they "transferred" still does not negate the fact that the identities behind the names are not confused by whoever were using them.

Now, it is interesting that the "supreme god" of these Africans didn't know Jesus as the Son of God simply because their supreme god had no son. Great. Leave the logic for now and turn to the Scriptures. What "Bible" would they have been reading if they didn't have the following verses in them? --

1 John 4:15 - "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God."

1 John 5:5 - "Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?"

1Jo 5:9-11 - "If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and[b] this life is in his Son[/b]."

What is the message of Christianity? That men might have life by God's grace. Where is this 'life' found? The Bible says it is in God's Son. Tell me how the "African converts to Christianity" could have heard all about Jesus, become "Christians" and yet still miss the divine Sonship of Jesus - with all the texts in the Bible that state the fact?

Maybe I didn't follow your line of thought; then please forgive me.

Your last line carries weight in so far as the Arabic-speaking Christians know that the Jesus/Isa/Issa they call upon is not the "another Jesus" of the Qur'an whose crucifixion and divine Sonship are there denied.

This is quite interesting, and many thanks to Havila and KDK for your insightful inputs (no less grateful to others so far).

It's not just the names but the identities behind the names. The *Allah* of Islam is not the God of the Bible who revealed Himself in a covenant relationship to the Jews, through whom salvation should come to the ends of the earth. So, how important is an identity? Let's think -

The words 'Lord' and 'Master' in religious language is used for God, the Creator of the world. Ask Muslims who is Lord, and they'll quickly respond: "Allah!" But way back in early Jewish history, the Israelites faced a temptation to confuse who was really "Lord". Why? Because, the word "Ba'al" simply means "Lord" or "Master" in the Semitic language of the Canaanite people around them. So, if in Hebrew the Jews called Him "Adon" (meaning the very same thing as "Lord" or "Master", would anyone be fooled into thinking that Ba'al and Adon were the same being/deity worshipped in different languages and cultures?

The Bible refutes such a notion in bold letters, because "Baal" (or the plural variant 'Baalim') is not the same being as "Adon"- "And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and served Baalim. . . And they forsook the LORD, and served Baal and Ashtaroth" (Jdg. 2:11, 13).

Elijah's challenge years later showed that true prophets are not fooled by 'it's only a name' game. "And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word." Jehu's action also showed that "Baal" was not the 'Lord' or 'Master' as "Adon" whom Israel worshipped: "Thus Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel" (2 Kings 10:28).

Without wanting to offend any people group, the variant names or appellations of God in various languages reveals the same thing. When people call "Chukwu" or "Oluwa" in African Churches, they know who they're referring to - the God who is called "Father" by those who believe in Jesus Christ the Son. But if those calling on "Chukwu" mean a different deity from the "Father" whom Jesus came to reveal, then you have your answer - the name may be the same, but the identities behind the "name" reveals different "god(s)". If a 'Supreme deity' is different from the One who has revealed Himself as "Jehovah", does the name make it the same? Ask those who call on the various African deities - they will tell you to whom they refer.

Fast forward to the New Testament. Christians are also in danger of confusing who the true Jesus is: "For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him" (2 Cor. 11:4). Who is this being masquerading as "Jesus" but is actually "another Jesus"?

It is a "Jesus" different from the Biblical Christ. It is a "Jesus" who did not die on the Cross, who is not the Saviour; who is a "slave" to some form of *Allah*; who denies the deity of Christ, the divine Fatherhood of God, the forgiveness of sins by His atoning work, and the Lordship of Jesus. This "another Jesus" pretends to be the Biblical Christ, but denies the true identity of the real Christ in saying that God has no Son, even though the Old Testament shows clearly that the Son was mentioned (Psa. 2:12).

For Arabic-speaking Christians, they know to Whom they're referring when they call upon "Allah" - but no true Christian from the Arabic-speaking world confuses Him with the *Allah* of the Qur'an. We are careful to point this out, and that's why I applaud Havila's effort, and join in praying for Muslims who have been given a "gospel" that presents "another Jesus" with "another spirit".

The *Allah* of Islam is not the God of the Bible.

@olabowale,

Again, many thanks for your calm and reasoned response, even though I beg to disagree with most of what you've posted. The ITK (I-too-know) syndrome happens in many quarters, and you've aptly encapsulated the sad case of 'little faith' that follows largely from that.

1. Having a "son" may not fit the majesty of God in Islamic thought; neither would the concept of "slave" befit a relationship that speaks about the character of God's love for people. The difficulty in this is that Muslims are made to believe "sonship" and "Father" implies God had a wife and sired an offspring as men do in biological procedures. This is nowhere taught in the Bible; and Muhammad's disdain about this divine relationship was so conspicuous in the Qur'an (Q.5:116), because Christianity has never taught that the Trinity was the Father, Mary the Mother and Jesus the Son; rather, it has always been the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit (Matt. 28:19).

2. It is interesting to follow your reasoning about God's revelation to prophets prior to Muhammad's time. So, if the revelation was pure as long as the prophet who received the book was alive, does the death of the said prophet invalidate the purity of the revelation that was supposed to have come from God? If that is so, then since Muhammad is dead, the Qur'an has become impure by the same rule. There should be no arbitrary rules about this: as long as you surmised that the revelations came from God, then God is able to keep and preserve His revelation from corruption down through the ages.

3. The aristocrats known as the 'Caliphs' who succeeded Muhammad in Islamic history fit well your description of nobilities who are more political than religious. In the case of the Qur'an, it is no secret that the third Caliph 'Uthman ibn 'Affan "modified the 'pure book' to fit the new agenda", or in other words, polluting the Qur'an from its original 'pure form' by ordering that only his redaction version stands while all the other extant copies of his day be burnt. If there was a need to burn other copies of the Qur'an, it only points to the fact that the Qur'an had corrupt variant readings - which again shows that Islam's holy and 'pure' book was afterall not so pure from the very onset of Islamic history.

4. It is meaningless that Christ's death should be put at the end of the world simply because the Qur'an mentions that every man shall taste death. I have offered that the death of Christ was prophecied in the very same books that the Qur'an endorses, particularly in the Psalms of David (see again Psa. 22:16 - "they pierced my hands and my feet" which is clearly in reference to the crucifixion of Jesus). That same Psalm 22 in verse 14 mentions the prophetic death of Christ as being "poured out like water", which the prophet Isaiah (ch.53:12) explained by God's inspiration as a sacrifice for sins --

"Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

5. I know you believe what the Qur'an states; but do you also believe what it states about the Psalms of David? One of such Psalms mentions that Christ was crucified by the piercing of His hands and feet; and so you see that Christ's death would be meaningless unless it had a significance. That significance was explained by several prophets long before Jesus was born. Correct me where I'm wrong, but it is remarkable that the very prophet who mentioned and explained the significance of Jesus' death was not mentioned at any one time in the Qur'an! That prophet was Isaiah, and you can turn to Isaian 53 and read the full narative for yourself. Is there any reason why such an important prophet should go unnoticed in Islam - or was it that if Muhammad had mentioned him, then Muslims would have questioned Muhammad's and *Allah's* denial of Jesus' crucifixion in the Qur'an? Jesus Himself believed that Isaiah was a prophet (see Matt. 13:13-14 and 15:7); and if Muhammad missed that, there is a suspicious element to the denial of the Crucifixion in the Qur'an.

6. The violent death that the Bible mentions in Jesus' case has been explained in one of my rejoinders, quoting the same Psalm 22:16 where it states: ". . . the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." The violence there only shows the wickedness of man, and the apostle Peter referenced it aptly when he said in his great sermon on Pentecost in Acts 2:23 -- "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." The 'determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God' in Peter's statement is clearly in reference to prophecies like in Isaiah 53 about the violent death that the Messiah would suffer for man's redemption.

7. The big picture is the resurrection - Jesus rose from death and so demonstrated His power to save. He is the Christ, the Saviour and Lord of all, and whoever puts their trust in Him (as Psalm 2:12 says), shall be saved and blessed. This blessing includes the peace Jesus offers to the heart, and I dare say that a true believer in Jesus Christ knows that peace on the inside despite the violence he sees around him.

Why the Qur'an is denying what the Psalms say about the death by crufixion of Christ which happened in the past but puts it in the future is sad. It only means that many are led to deny the very act that would save them. . . until the truth is revealed to them too late as to how Muhammad was the one who denied what would have saved him and Muslims.

8.

olabowale:
My story about Moses was directly from the Qur'an. Read Chapter 20. You will be amazed.
The love of Muslims to God is very genuine. The Muslims begins every affair by mentioning God's name. We praise God in every occasion. When a muslim is afraid of God, that muslim runs to Him. Seeking refuge in Him against the evils of his own soul, from other creations and asking for full protection from God.

May God bless all those who run to Him when in fear and doubt, even as David mentions in the Psalms - "What time I am afraid, I will trust in thee" (Psa. 56:3). However, Muhammad would know nothing about the story about Moses if he didn't get it from the Bible.

Besides, I don't doubt that many Muslims love God - and I've witnessed many sincere and genuine love in many people. However, in a relationship, love goes both ways and flows in both directions. I don't know where in the Qur'an or to what degree it is said that *Allah* loves man. I'm still carefully reading the Qur'an, but it might help if you have a reference that says *Allah* loves man unconditionally.

In the Bible, we see God's love for man in John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life", and Rom. 5:8 ("But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us". In consequence, we can truly respond in love to God because of what He did for us - "We love him, because he first loved us" (1 John 4:19). No one can truly love God if he/she has not known the God who loves unconditionally and freely. That God loves us so much that, rather than call us "slaves", He desires us to be known as His "children" who call Him "Father."

"Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not." (1 John 3:1).

You have nothing to lose if you can know that love the Father gives. It is still offered - by simply trusting in His Son, just as again the Psalms say: " Kiss the Son, . . . Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him" (Psa. 2:12). May I persuade you to read the Psalms of David that *Allah* in the Qur'an says he sent down upon David - those Psalms show that Christ was both crucified and resurrected for our salvation. Do you believe in the Psalms? Will you trust in the Son as the Psalms say in chapter 2:12? Or will you deny what the Qur'an says about *Allah* sending the Psalms upon David?

Jesus says: "Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me." Don't wait until a future death of Christ - it will never happen! The choice is yours - Jesus is Lord! 

Problem is, if nobody called Him "Jesus" during His life here on earth, where did Muhammad engineer his own version of "Isa" from long after Jesus was no longer on earth? Muhammad didn't speak Hebrew, or I wonder what He would have tried to call "J[/b]ihad" if he had wanted to invade the Jews (or is it "[b]iews"?)! Or, for those in making the Ha[b]jj[/b], should we now change that to Ha[b]ii[/b]? Or, an Alhaji should now be written as Alha[b]ii[/b]??

The point is, if Hebrew was not Muhammad's language, why quarrel with those who know the Saviour as "Jesus"? At least, nobody called Him "Isa" during His life, and why quarrel with others if Muhammad didn't speak the "Language of Jesus" in the first place?

I hope these lessons will not erupt into another iihad (or, for those of us with the "J" in our phonetics, that should be "Jihad"!

firdaus4us:
We Muslim accept all the past Books sent down by Allah. We accept all his Prophet, we say nothing bad about them, unlike you christian, only Jesus is good, the rest not holy.

Are you kidding me - that Muslims accept all the past Books and all the prophets of *Allah*? What I often read in Muslim arguments is quite to the contrary; for the claim by Muslims to accept all the Scriptures and the Prophets is superficial. Have you read the Law of Moses, the Psalms of David, the Gospel of Jesus Christ; and the inspired writings of Solomon (Qur'an 4:163)? What some Muslims cannot accept, they switch over and deny - and that's precisely what they do with those Biblical books that they cannot accept, and so claim that over time they have been changed or altered or corrupted in some way.

The fact that only Jesus is good is quite evident even from the perspective of Islam. Muhammad confessed with his own lips that he was a sinner, so much so about his sins that he had to repent a hundred times a day in repentance! And which one of the 'Prophets' was half as good as Jesus? We do not deride the prophets; but it is amazing that when people have said contemptible things about Jesus, Muslims are so taciturn and shrug their shoulders like it is not their business; whereas, for a man whose sins were multiplied to a hundred times a day, there has often been riots to defend this man from the Quraish tribe called Muhammad.

firdaus4us:
Infact Q5:71-72 u quoted, makes us to realised that Jesus said you will be in Hell if u call him Allah.

First, that was Muhammad's thinking, and not what Jesus said.

Second, if you meant the *Allah* of the Qur'an, then Jesus is most definitely not that *Allah*. Reading the Bible and the Qur'an reveals this, and there's just no substance to Muhammad's claim in the Qur'an to have been purporting that he was delivering a message from the God revealed in the Bible.

Third, Jesus never said what you stated about Q5:71-72. Read it again and see that He did not say "you will be in Hell if u call him Allah", for the supposed quotation of Jesus you referenced in that verse ends with ". . .your Lord", as highlighted and emboldened in red --

72. They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.

It doesn't help to put words in Jesus' mouth while you're trying to correct another!

firdaus4us:
Jesus ascended into heaven. Yes, he ascended to the heaven by Allah's leave without being crusified contrary to your bible opinion that he was crusified.

If the crucifixion of Christ was merely somebody's opinion, then the Qur'an was merely Muhammad's opinion. Why? Because the Qur'an states that *Allah* gave the Psalms to David in Q.4:163. This is what one of those Psalms says: "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet" (Psa. 22:16). Question: who was being "pierced" in hands and feet other than Jesus on the Cross?

So, it's either you didn't get it right; or by denying that the Psalms stated what it did, you also deny that the Qur'an claimed what *Allah* stated in Q.4:163.

firdaus4us:
Q4:159 means on the death bed of each and everyone of you, christian, you shall be made to known by the Angel that Jesus son of Maryam was not crucified. It also means, when Jesus comes back to the surface of the earth, all christians alive then, will know that he was neither crucified nor raise from dead during his first life on earth.

Q.19:33-34.
33 "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"!
34 Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.

As stated above, the Qur'an endorses the Psalms of David, and one of such Psalms records that Jesus was actually pierced in hands and feet. There is no dispute about this, unless those who cannot accept what the Qur'an states about the Psalms have to deny it and by so doing disavow the claims of *Allah* in that text.

firdaus4us:
Q9:31 you qouted says nothing about messiah, it is even against u. Read below
"They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah. there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)."

I'm surprised that it is a serious offence to associate partners with *Allah* in the Qur'an, and yet, that is precisely what the Qur'an has done in large proportions. If there are no partners with *Allah* in the Qur'an, then who are those who are claiming to have done the work of creation in the following texts in the Qur'an? --

Q.15:26 - "We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape."

Q.19:67 - "But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?"

The Qur'an says "there is nothing whatever like unto Him" (Q.42:11); so the question is: who then could have been claiming to do the same work of creation as the Creator Himself, according to the same Qur'an? Who are the "WE" in "We created" in the texts above - *Allah* alone; or *Allah* and those nameless spirits associating themselves with him? The texts are clear - "We created" - so who is the "WE" that are associating themselves with this *Allah* of the Qur'an, and yet calling it a blashpemy for others to do so?

firdaus4us:
We have read them and we found out that our imams, mullahs, and sheiks etc are right but YOU ARE A FOOL, DISSEMBLER and we are saved from your WILES.

Not surprising, that those who are "right" can be so derisive at others.

Dear Olabowale,

olabowale:
@4get_me; My dearest sister, it is true that i am not a scholar of the Bible nor of the Qur'an. However, people who hold scholarship on these books or the religions the books came for could be people whose deeds are not are in essence opposite the teachings of the books.

I'm not quite clear about the last line of your statement; care to clarify?

olabowale:
First, all i know is that I just do not see why the God that created all things, without prior examples needs to kill some body innocent to forgive sinners.

I understand your difficulty. However, there are a few things you might want to consider:

(a) God did not need to kill an innocent person in order to forgive sinners; however, He gave His Son in love to redeem sinners - and I count as one of those for whom Christ died and rose again.

(b) Second, this redemption in Jesus Christ was severally prophecied in the Biblical Scriptures that the Qur'an itself endorses - which all include those mentioned earlier, long before Jesus was born: the Law of Moses (Genesis 3:15), the Psalms of David (Psalm 22); and the prophecy of Isaiah (Isaiah 53), and Zechariah (Zech. 12:10). I'd amicably offer that our Muslim friends look at the Qur'an again and ask why it reports that *Allah* endorsed the very books of the Bible containing these prophecies of Jesus' death for sinners. If these books of the Bible already made these prophecies, why did the *Allah* not reject them altogether instead of claiming that He actually gave the Psalms to David and the Law to Moses?

(c) Third, it is a common belief in Islam that Jesus will return again, then die and be raised to life (resurrected). In other words, Islam believes in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, although places these events at some point in future. My question is, why would this same innocent Jesus have to die at some point in the future if Islam denies His death and resurrection now, since He is innocent and sinless?

(d) It is yet more evident that in the Qur'an, Jesus death and resurrection are spoken of by His own lips - "So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)"! (Sura 19:33, Yusuf Ali trans.).

These are just references to the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, hidden in golden nuggets in the Qur'an. However, the important issue is that in reference to your question, why God who created all things would need to kill somebody innocent to forgive sinners. The simple answer I could give you is that Jesus took my place, as determined by divine prophecy, so that a sinner like me could be saved from divine wrath on Judgement Day. More than that, the death of Jesus on the Cross set me free from sin's aweful grip, sanctified me by His shed blood, defeated Satan, and gave me the assurance of God's forgiveness in my heart. I personalise these things because I know that Jesus death and resurrection are real, even though many people have a difficulty in understanding what God can do for those who believe in Jesus Christ.

olabowale:
Afterall, He is God Who is full of Mercy. He did not have to come down to humilate Himself in the hand of His creation. This last sentence is addressing some of the people who say that Jesus is himsel God! I am not sure if you are also in this group.

That may well be true from a human point of view; however, the big picture is that while He did not have to come down to humiliate Himself in the hands of His creation, He amazingly chose to do just that - to give men the chance to prove their wickedness to the uttermost! This is how the Bible puts it in one of the Psalms of David (remember that the Qur'an endorses the Psalms as well?) --  "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet" (Psa. 22:16).

Yet, in all of this display of wickedness, the prophet Zechariah recorded that this very same One would pour out the Spirit of grace and of supplication upon those who pierced Him (Zech. 12:10)! Could anyone measure such forgiving mercy? Indeed, God is full of Mercy, and in no one else was that mercy demonstrated than in Jesus Christ.

No doubt, I am one of those who believe that what the Scriptures declare about Jesus reveal Him to be God Himself. I know how 'blasphemous' this may sound to our Muslim friends; but if I deny what the Bible reveals about Jesus, then my Muslim friends should be ready to deny as well whatever the Qur'an has endorsed, in that the Qur'an made a blasphemous mistake in stating that *Allah* actually was the one who revealed and confirmed the very Biblical texts that teach about the deity of Jesus Christ in the Psalms of David (see Psalm 2:12 for example - "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him".

olabowale:
God Who defeated Pharaoh, at the zenieth of his power, having jurisdiction over 1/3 of the whole world. This defeat came at the hand of a runway, a person who was not eloquent in speech. this man was Moses. Moses did not have anything except his supporting stick. That was enough material for God. Such is the power of the Most powerful, The irresistable.

Yes, and I'm happy for you if you believe the Biblical account of Moses being used of God to overthrow Pharaoh with the instrumentality of a mere stick. I'd like to add by way of reminder that God has also used other less means of instrumentality to secure great victory for His people. However, nothing overturns or stands in the way of God's sure prophetic Word. What He declares, He also performs - and if He declared prophetically that Jesus' death was for sinners (Isaiah 53:12), who is able to resist that?

olabowale:
I have answered as much as I can of the flood of questions that the christians have asked. My Muslim brothers and sisters who have more knowledge and even greater faith/belief than me have done better job. may God reward them. If you accept guidance is for your own good, if you reject it, you are free as well.

Sometimes, I find your inputs quite cordial even though I may not agree with most of them. In fair exchange, all I'm trying to do is amicably offer you some reasoning from both the Qur'an and the Bible as to the matters being discussed to the effect that Jesus is and was exactly what the Bible calls Him - the Christ, the Son of the Living God (Matt. 16:16), and this was prophetically confirmed by the Psalms of David that the Qur'an said *Allah* sent down and confirmed (see again Psalm 2:12 that specifically mentioned "the Son" in whom we should put our trust!).

olabowale:
Some people will simply hear the call to prayer, their haerts will melt. They will hurry to accept islam. It is as if the thirsty was given a cold drink to quench the thirst.

A call to prayer is all well and good; but what God is seeking is a genuine relationship with those who worship Him - and that is what Jesus came to offer everyone freely by the huge cost of His atoning sacrifice on the Cross. This is why Jesus often referred to God in the Bible as "Father"; and He taught His disciples to pray to God as "Our Father in Heaven." As far as I know, *Allah* in Islam does not offer that relationship, and what then does a call to prayer avail if those who worship God see Him as distant from the deepest needs of their hearts?

I enjoyed some of the challenges you raised so far; but here is something as food for thought. Why was Jesus called Christ in the Qur'an, if He was not the Saviour?

Lastly, I'm male, not a "sister". 

@Olabowale,

olabowale:
My people, but the world was predicted to end in August 2006. What happened. Is this just like the many predictions of old which ended in a wimper.

One thing you have to understand is that people have always made "predictions" and they failed because such 'prophets' disregarded the Scriptures. In fair exchange, could you help us with any authentic 'prediction' that Muhammad made that has proven any better than these failed 'prophets'?

olabowale:
Some try to explain away the Bible verses, but they have no authority nor having any scholarship. The real issue is whether the material source that you are using is pure or even a good source for that matter. It does not matter the luster, a fools gold is exactly that. It has no weight.

I wonder what authority or scholarship you have on either the Bible or the Qur'an, as is quite obvious that you have not been able to defend some of the quotes in the Qur'an in some other threads.

Meanwhile, you have just demonstrated poor scholarship by trying to insinuate that the "material source" (the Bible, supposedly) is not pure, or that it is not even a good source. It's either you have a problem with the Qur'an itself or with the "Allah" of Islam who claimed to have both sent down, revealed and confirmed the same "material" you repudiate! In other words, if "a fools gold is exactly that", then you make me wonder that *Allah's* claim in the Qur'an has no weight!

olabowale:
You need the god, who protects and is the Only One that can forgive. Not the Okey dokey concept that all of a sudden somebody appeared on the world stage to take away your sins.

The first part of your statement really needs to sink down into your heart - you really need that God who both protects and forgives every sin; and only in Jesus Christ can you find real protection and forgiveness that God offers. Think about it for a moment, if Muhammad actually found that protection and forgiveness in the true God, how come he pitifully cried in his dying moments that he was not sure what *Allah* would do to him in that day? Those who find true forgiveness can know even now and here that their future is secure - and that is precisely what Jesus Christ came to offer in His death and resurrection.

Second, the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the Cross was and is not an 'Okey dokey concept' that happened all of a sudden - it was long predicted in the Scriptures of the Old Testament found in the Bible, precisely in the Psalms of David which the Qur'an categorically endorses as having been sent down, revealed, confirmed and given by the *Allah* of the Islamic faith. Surprised? Let me remind you what the Qur'an says *Allah* did with the Psalms of David in Sura 4:163 (Yusuf Ali translation) -

"We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms.."

Now if it is true that Islam's *Allah* gave the Psalms to David, what is written in the Psalms about Jesus death on the Cross? See, for example, the following -

"All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him. . . I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. . . They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture." (Psa. 22:7-8, 14, & 18).

"I am poured out like water" is a typical Jewish expression that the Biblical prophets well understood as indicating the death of someone; and to this the prophet Isaiah was very clear in declaring Jesus' atoning death with something akin to this expression -

"Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors." (Isaiah 53:12).

Indeed, the Psalms of David (which the Qur'an endorses) clearly reveal and confirm that Jesus' death for the sinners was not a sudden 'okey dokey concept' - it was long predicted, not only by prophet David, but also by Isaiah, (Isaiah 53), by Moses (in Gen. 3:15), by Zechariah (Zech. 12:10 - "and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced", and by a few others. Biblical prophecies are easy to understand, and God by His Spirit is more than willing to give revelation and understand of these things to anyone who asks Him by faith in Jesus' name.

olabowale:
The God who forgives is able to forgive without having to kill any one in order to forgive the sins of others including later generations.

That may well be true - but the fact that He gave His only begotten Son Jesus Christ for our sins goes deeply to show the immeasurable love and grace of the heart of God. Sin brings death (otherwise, why does Islam preach that sinners would be destroyed on Judgement Day?); but notice that God who seeks to forgive undeserving sinners layed the debt of man's sins on His own righteous Son, so that those who believe in Him would not have to face the second death - which is divine judgement on that great Day.

Jesus Himself confirmed that no one could kill Him unless the Father permitted it - "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father" (John 10:17-18).

Jesus was not afraid of death, but He went to the Cross for sinners and not for Himself - because it was so determined by prophecy long before Jesus was born.

olabowale:
I wonder why the companions of Jesus continue to do good and worship God the way their leader Jesus taught them.

Why should we stop doing good and worshipping God in Spirit and in truth - as Jesus "our leader" taught us? Infact, you have clearly exposed here the Islamic distaste of Jesus, because right from the onset it has always been a matter of "us" and "them" - for that is what Muhammad came to preach. Muhammad knew from the very onset his claim to have been sent by God would be exposed as false, so he tried to give credence to it by claiming that his own *Allah* was the same that sent Jesus!

olabowale:
This above is before Paul enter to the fold of the companions of Jesus. Yes, I know, some of us will not quickly cast away Paul in the face of tremendous evidence to do so. Who do you believe, Jesus or Paul. If you believe Jesus, then learn about him from every available source and find out the real truth about him and follow his directive, even if you have to through away your present believe and come into a new way.

If Muhammad truly believed in the truth about Jesus, he most definitely would have thrown away his believes in Islam and come to the real truth - Jesus Himself, who proclaimed "I AM THE WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE" (John 14:6). This has nothing to do with Paul, because Jesus made that bold declaration about Himself before Paul became a Christian. Jesus truly saves, and He still offers that salvation to all who would receive by simple faith.

@lordimpaq,

No my dear brother, I'm not insinuating that you're a backslider - not at all, and I apologise if that's what you might've construed in my reply. In summary, I said that "the observance of days is simply a misunderstanding of the glory of the Gospel", and I quoted Gal. 4:9-11 to show that the observance of days among others highlights that misunderstanding.

I would not remotely refer to you as a Gentile, and hope that you can understand my point now.

precious68:
Is it right to play love in church?

'Players' and 'scorers' should take it easy in Church. There are 'strikers' who should be sent off with 'red cards', some banned where they have played 'off-side' (like the rascal in Seun's link above); and please, please, and please remember: there are no 'free-kicks' in this game! It doesn't matter what 'season' it is played, and whether you fall in the 'semi- or quater-finals', please don't break the rules. FIFA rules apply ([b]F[/b]aith-[b]I[/b]ntegrity-[b]F[/b]idelity-[b]A[/b]cumen). Penalties are usually awarded to offending players which include 'sugar-daddies' and 'sugarcane-mummies', married men and women, randy pastors, and others in that category. 'Coaches' should always remind their teams to keep a clear view of their 'goals' as no foul play is allowed.


Prov. 18:22 - Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favour of the LORD.

It's great to read the support variously given in such time of desperation. Under18, relax and let your sister get on with her life. Suicide is not an option, and with good care she could live a healthy, normal life.

downwide:
as you know cpa is a chr. most christian will not want to attend, reason i don't
know but being a xtian too i will like to do as others are doing.but she insist that i must
follow her

Now you know the reason why most Christians will NOT want to attend CPA. Run for your life before you become the next murder victim of Rev. Dr. King-etc-etc!

It doesn't matter how long it takes but God's Word will surely come to pass.

Hab. 2:3 For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.

Good point, LiquidMind.

It's true that the Bible makes clear that all sins are not equal. Some sins are forgiveable and some are not. Most religions view sins differently. Islam also has a belief in "forgiveable" and "unforgiveable" sins, and the method of dealing with them are different from the way these are dealt with in other religions.

Another thing that crosses my mind is that in Catholicism, sins are classified as either "venial" (that is, pardonable) or "mortal" (heinous and deadly) sins. It does not appear that Catholic tradition deals with sins in a clear-cut Biblical context of "forgiveable" and "unforgiveable" sins.

On the whole, whatever is the understanding we have on the subject, we should pursue righteousness and shun sin in all its forms; not even allowing any such in our lives under the excuse that they are "forgiveable".

@Abeem,

Abeem:
It is not for a non-Muslim to question the logic or otherwise of a people wanting to be governed by Sharia. If the people want it, why can't they have it. It is only non-Muslims who always think of Sharia laws as unbecoming of the civilized world.

I'd echo m4malik's persuasion by stating that the Sharia is out of sync with a civilized world. It may be alright for some Muslims to prefer the Sharia to civil rule, but to impose that on non-Muslims is, in practical terms, quite uncivilized.

Douzy:
In fact, it is only in the 19th Century that the English Revised Version of the Bible translated the name (of the Spirit of God) as Holy Spirit.

Well, you made good points in your post, but I'm not so sure that the translation with the appellation "Holy Spirit" was only as recent as the 19th century. Back in the 16th century, the Geneva Bible of 1587 uses "holy Spirit" in two verses in the NT -

Eph. 4:30 - And grieue not the holy Spirit of God, by whom ye are sealed vnto ye day of redemption.

1 Thes. 4:8 - Hee therefore that despiseth these thinges, despiseth not man, but God who hath euen giuen you his holy Spirit.

There's just no sound reasoning in preferring either word; whether "holy Spirit" or "holy Ghost" is correct - He is the same.

Bobbyaf:
Are you saying that God is stupid? It must be since it was He who instituted the day for our good.

You see what your problem is? Nowhere did I remotely suggest any such thing and it's all up to you to call God stupid and insist that "It must be". This was why I offered that you temper your language with grace, but obviously you had it your way.

lordimpaq:
i assume he is referring to his replies to my own posts

Of course, I was.

Bobbyaf:
Why not deal with them here since I am responding to you over here. I'd prefer and appreciate if you copy and paste the same response you posted elsewhere.

It's not difficult and you could easily have done that.

source one

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

I understand your persuasions about Acts 17:2. But read it in its context, and you'll understand that Paul wasn't discoursing with or engaging Christians on the Sabbath or in the synagogues. Rather, his audience were the Jews, as the context bears out in verse 1 - "Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews". It was with these Jews at Thessalonica that Paul engaged in such a persuasive manner to convince them that Jesus was the Christ. He would hardly need to do this to people who were already Christians and were convinced that Jesus was actually the Christ. You will find the result in verse 4 where it says: "And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few."

So, it was with the Jews that the apostle reasoned with in order to convince them that Jesus is the Christ; which would clearly mean that the meeting was an evangelistic engagement and not a Christian gathering.

Reading the connecting verses in Isaiah 56:6-7 ~

"Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people."

It would be clear that the passage was not revealing or detailing New Testament spirituality, but rather what obtained under the dispensation of the Law. This is clear by mention of "their burnt offerings and their sacrifices" to be accepted upon the LORD's "altar". When you turn over to the NT, you'll find that the burnt offerings and sacrifices were confirmed to be under the economy of the OT, and were not a continuum for the NT -

(a) (Heb. 10:1, 5).
"For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. . . Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me."

(b) (Heb. 10:6-9)
"In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."

Infact, the last verse is one of the reasons why I'm persuaded that the Mosaic Law does not hold for the NT Christian - God has taken it away in order to establish the new covenant ratified by the Blood of Christ - "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." (Col. 2:14). So, the covenant, burnt offerings and sacrifices we read of in Isaiah 56:6 are well suited to the Old Testament economy; and Isaiah could not have been detailing the new covenant. This again confirms that Isaiah's mention of the Sabbath was not to be applied to NT Christians, otherwise we would have had to apply the burnt offerings and sacrifices he spoke about in those verses.

As a rule, OT prophets were not given to understand NT details -

Eph. 3:3-5 --
"How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit."

----------------------------------------

Now in Matt. 5:17 when Christ said: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil", He was not thereby asking that Christians should live by the Law. Rather, He testified that He came to 'fulfil' them, in the sense that He would bring about the actual content of the Law, especially in reference to the prophetic nature of the Law in reference to Himself. This is why after His resurrection, He explained the import of what He meant in the fulifilling of the Law and the prophets -

"And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. (Luke 24:44).

His death and resurrection effectively fulfilled the Law, the prophets and the psalms - that is why the inspired writer of Hebrews argued from the same OT that God would take away the Law of the Old Covenant in order to establish the New Covenant in His Son - the One who came to do the Father's will and pleasure -

Heb 10:8-10
"Above when he said (that is, Jesus Christ prophetically declared this statement) Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

Notice that this declaration we find in Hebrews 10 is actually a quote from Psalm 40:6-8, which clearly point to the fact that Christ was prophetically speaking there, and had foreseen that God had not eternal satisfaction in the sacrifices and burnt offerings of the OT, such as Isaiah mentioned.

So, the Lord Jesus Christ actually fulfilled the Law and the Prophets, but not in a way as to ask Christians to revert to the OT to keep the Mosaic Law and the Sabbath. The reality of what pleases God is to be found in Jesus Christ, as the inspired apostle argued with great clarity in Col. 2:16-17.

Blessings.
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤




source two

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤


lordimpaq,     

Okay, I'm sorry - I shouldn't have been too forward with the 'lollypop' interjection. It's true that up until the resurrection, the disciples clearly observed the sabbath, as infact we read in Luke 23:55-56 -

"And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid. And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment."

Following that, after the church had been established, we read in Acts that Paul and his companions were accustomed to preaching and engaging the Jews on the sabbath in order to point them to Christ:

"But when they departed from Perga, they came to Antioch in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and sat down. . . And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. . . And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God." (Act 13:14, 42, 44).

"And on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither." (Act 16:13).

"And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures" (Act 17:2).

"And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ." (Act 18:4-5).

The last reference shows that all the meetings and engagements Paul and his companions had on the sabbaths were not Christian gatherings for NT worship - they were more like evangelistic opportunities for him as occasion to persuade both Jews and Greeks that Jesus was the Christ. So, it would not be correct to draw the conclusion that Christians were still observing the Sabbath as stipulated in the OT for the Jews. That is why under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he cautioned that the Sabbath was only a shadow of things which find their reality and subtance in Christ, and we should not be judged on the basis of keeping the sabbath and a few other things in just the manner stipulated for the Jews (Col. 2:16-17).

To further strengthen this persuasion, please note that only the Jews were answerable to the Law - the Gentiles were not held accountable to the stipulations of the Law: "Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God" (Rom 2:17). When you carefully follow the sequence of this very interesting discussion in Romans, you can't miss the fact that Christians are not Jews, and therefore you cannot apply a Jewish Law to non-Jews in the Body of Christ. Here's the sequence -

First Sequence:

"Now we know that ^awhat things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law (that is, the Jews): that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. ^bTherefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now ^cthe righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference . . . Therefore we conclude that ^da man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." (Rom 3:19-22, 28)

Follow the sequence of the argument of the inspired apostle: the Law was never given to Gentiles (that is, non-Jews) to observe; and to hold Gentiles accountable to the Law is to subvert the grace provided in Christ. The Law was given only to the Jews: "Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rom 9:4).
--------------------------------------------------------

For Christians who are in the Body of Christ, the scripture says:

For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. (Rom 6:14). . . and that is because, "now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." (Rom 7:6). You should realise that in the Body of Christ, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:28). And that being so, we are not held accountable under the Law - For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth" (Rom 10:4). This is the reason why the Bible exhorts that we can't be judged "in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ" (Col. 2:16-17).

So, as you say, no one has the power to change God's authority. The question is, can anyone as such change God's authority of the New Testament? What we both need is a careful, time-spent, prayerful study of God's Word - and then the understanding becomes clear in the economy of His covenants, and we find there are no ambiguities there.

Blessings.


¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

Hi lordimpaq,

How could I be catching fun at the expense of what God's Word says? We've discussed this issue before and when one reads the NT carefully it is hard to miss the point that the observance of days is simply a misunderstanding of the glory of the Gospel.

Gal 4:9-11
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

It is the same word in Greek [pneuma], and is used for "spirit". God's Holy Spirit = the Holy Ghost, and in nature Jesus said "a spirit hath not flesh and bones" (Luke 24:39), indicating that 'spirit' is incorporeal.

But then again, the Spirit is not "the mind of God" - for the Spirit Himself has a mind of His own (Rom. 8:27 - And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.) He is much more than a 'mind', for He is God the Holy Spirit who together with the Father and the Son comprises the Trinity. That is why you find that the attributes of a living Personality are acsribed to Him -

¤ The Spirit teaches - John 14:26

¤ He can be lied to - Acts 5:3

¤ He calls to service and sends ministers forth - Acts 13:2-4.

There shouldn't be any confusion about it, for both expressions are used in the Word of God, and God has honoured prayers offered in the power of the Holy Ghost/Holy Spirit.

Keep sounding off Bobby - it's your forté, isn't it?

m4malik:
Oh well, I thought I was the only one who saw his inconsistencies, and there's no need for me to reply to such. Thanks for your observations.

No, there's really no need, and thanks for taking that option.

Bobbyaf:
Listen to me well my friend I don't need your advice about consistency. Its either you contribute to the topic or not. This is not a kindergarten section of the board. People are entitled to their views.

I was entitled to mine as well.

Bobbyaf:
Obviously you are in agreement with Malik, and I have no problem with that, but its also obvious that you're biased in your remarks, being quick to point out that I need to demonstrate more grace in my speech.

Oh I get it - you got miffed at my agreeing with m4malik, and I suddenly became "biased" because there's a rule against agreeing with people on Nairaland? As for the grace part, you may continue as so pleases you.