₦airaland Forum

MaxInDHouse:
@ Shadeyinka.

This is the explanation for Exodus 6:3!

Stop this please, it's insulting to people who actually study and understand the Bible.

God himself said, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob didn't know him as Jehovah yet you're trying to use permutations and combinations to prove God's word wrong just because your denomination worships the name Jehovah.

Even Jesus never for once called God Jehovah. He even declared that no one (not even Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) has ever seen the Father except him. Meaning only what he calls God is valid. And he calls God Father not Jehovah.

But maybe you're followers of Moses and not Jesus Christ just like the Jews.

haekymbahd:
What name did Abraham call God and prophets before Moses e.g Noah because the name Jehovah was revealed exclusively to Moses...


Since the jews, Christian, Muslim claim to worship the God of Abraham so can you tell us the name Abraham called God?

Very good question!
The name YHWH was only revealed to Moses and wasn't even mentioned in the new testament. Jesus simply referred to God as Father.

MaxInDHouse:
You didn't get my point!
We are not talking about manners that's preached in virtually all religions, if that is what you are looking for then you can't differentiate Christians from other religions.
Just take a deep breath and think 'it was in the city of Antioch where Jesus' disciples were first addressed as CHRISTIANS {Act 11:26} please ask yourself ©was it that people living in Antioch weren't hospitable, humble and generous that made the Christians to stand out so that they were given that tag? Are we saying there are no such virtuous people around that makes Jesus' followers unique? The answer is "NO!" Jesus' disciples are known with the duty their Master assigned to them, they must go from house to house in their neighbourhood to PREACH and TEACH just as their leader who claims to be the Christ always do during his lifetime! Matthew 28:19-20; Act 1:8

Whether a member is fast catching up with the laid down principles their leader taught them or not each Christians knew quite well that what keeps him constantly in Jesus' sight spiritually speaking is the duty assigned to the group, note Jesus' concluding words found @ Matthew 28:20 after telling them what they must continue doing he said "I am with you always until the end of the world"

So no matter how chaste anyone may prove to be the only means of becoming a child of Jesus' God is taking up the responsibility to go out for the preaching and teaching work Jesus assigned to his disciples. One may ask "but what about other nice and kind people in other religions who aren't doing this? Will God destroy them simply because they're not going out to preach? What about many among Jesus' followers who aren't virtuous? Will God just spare them simply because they're following Jesus' group to preach?"

If you want to know the answers to all these questions just ask and i will oblige! Matthew 7:7-8

May you have PEACE!

You mean evangelism is what differentiates a Christian from others? Jesus did not say it is by evangelism that people will identify his disciples. Rather he said by Loving one another will people know who are his disciples.

Evangelism is one of the many responsibilities of a Christian. But that is not why the people of Antioch called the followers of Christ Christians. Rather it was their manner of living.

MaxInDHouse:
The group name "Christians" was borrowed from the mouth of observers in Antioch {Act 11:26} what quantifies a person to be a Christian is the ability to humble oneself and be prepared to forgo whatever it may cost to become one of those practicing pure worship!

Where most people got it wrong is thinking a Christian must have the characters of Jesus, but that's a misconception a Christian only humbles himself for knowledge and his transformation is a gradual process, contrary to a none Christian who feels he's ok as long as he is better in behaviour than others around him.

A Christian may have dubious characters but one thing makes the difference he acknowledges that God wants him to improve and he's interested in the one and only form of teaching that can help in transforming him into whatever God approves! Luke 19:2-10

This is true of any one devoted to any religion. Not Christianity alone. Muslims, Jews, Traditionalists and even Chinese Monks.

I've met devout Muslims who are more pious than most pastors, whose humility and generosity and hospitality leaves one speechless.

Biblically, a Christian should manifest the life of Christ both in speech, conduct, spiritual gifts and fruit of the spirit. However we observe this is hardly so.

In fact some business owners don't even want to hire Christians because some Christians profess righteousness only to end up embezzling the company funds. Cos they believe all they have to do is ask for forgiveness in the name of Jesus.lol

hoopernikao:
I have actually answers this severally in my write up.

New Covenant as called by the Scriptures, is the covenant of God in Christ. And it simply means THE GIVING OF THE SPIRIT.

Note that calling it New is not about the time frame but because there exist old that was compromised (the covenant of God with Israel) by the recipient: Israel. Hence, the word Old and New is in relation to that.

Gal 3:14

14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

Notice that the word there is MIGHT RECEIVE THE PROMISED SPIRIT not promise of the spirit.

Genesis 12:1-3

1 Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: 2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing. 3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

This is the same thing promised to Abraham.
Notice verse 3.

In thee shall families of the earth be blessed

This is what Paul called Abraham blessing in Galatians 3:14 (the spirit).

Observe that when God gave Abraham this covenant he wasn't a Jew or Israelite. So that statement "in the shall the families of the earth be blessed" will refer to

1. Israel as the chosen executor of the covenant
2. All Gentile nations.

Hence everyone is captured under Abraham's blessing and covenant.

So, it's in Abraham that the whole world (Gentiles included now) is blessed and this is not talking about land or cars or houses. But the Spirit.

Hence, the covenant fulfilled in Christ is what God promised Abraham which is to happen through Israel, to be executed by Israel. Israel failed in this hence, that agreement of God with Israel has to be terminated. This is what you called Old.

That same covenant with Abraham now has a new mediator, executor, which is Jesus Christ.
This is why it's called the New Covenant. Because the Old was done away with.

So in reality, there is only one covenant in the Bible per say and that's the promise of God to Abraham, which is the promised spirit, the receiving of the spirit even unto Gentiles.

When the Bible use the word Old or New Covenant it is actually in relation to the executors which are Israel (Old because it failed and terminated), Jesus (New because there was a former, that was terminated).

Ezek 36:26-27
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. 28 And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.

The promised spirit. Same.

Heb 8:7-9

7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

Observe that it affirms to you the reason for the New Covenant. It's because the first was faulty.


Joel 2:28
And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:


In Acts 2, Peter quoted the same on the day of Pentecost when the spirit was given.


Hence, firstly, if you see the promise in the covenant beyond the giving of the Spirit, you are going to have issues with understanding the covenant.

Secondly, if you see the covenant given to Israel as different from that given to Abraham or that we have in Christ now, then there is also an issue. The singular plan of God for humanity is the giving of the Spirit, the Spirit of God. That is why in all OT you will find the word, My Spirit, God's Spirit, Spirit of God has a promise to man. This refer to the same thing in NT that is now called Spirit of Christ, Spirit of the Son etc why? The Son fulfilled the promised Spirit for man.

---

Observe, you will see the this happened (the giving, supply of the spirit) in OT as temporary act.

Prophets of Old only gave God's utterance when the spirit descend on them, but temporal.

Numbers 11:16
16 The Lord answered Moses, “Bring Me 70 men from Israel known to you as elders and officers of the people. Take them to the tent of meeting and have them stand there with you. 17 Then I will come down and speak with you there. I will take some of the Spirit who is on you and put the Spirit on them They will help you bear the burden of the people, so that you do not have to bear it by yourself.

Observe that, a temporal act to remind Moses of God's covenant of the spirit.

Read on
24 Moses went out and told the people the words of the Lord. He brought 70 men from the elders of the people and had them stand around the tent. 25 Then the Lord descended in the cloud and spoke to him. [i]He took some of the Spirit that was on Moses and placed the Spirit on the 70 elders. As the Spirit rested on them, they prophesied, but they never did it again. [/i]

They receive the Spirit, they prophesied.


Now note what happened after

26 Two men had remained in the camp, one named Eldad and the other Medad; the Spirit rested on them—they were among those listed, but had not gone out to the tent—and they prophesied in the camp. 27 A young man ran and reported to Moses, “Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp.”

Two men not part of those outside.


[b]28[/b] Joshua son of Nun, assistant to Moses since his youth,[j] responded, “Moses, my lord, stop them!”


Please observe Moses response.

29 But Moses asked him, “Are you jealous on my account? If only all the Lord’s people were prophets and the Lord would place His Spirit on them! ” 30 Then Moses returned to the camp along with the elders of Israel.

Moses spoke the Lord's mind: that the mind of God is for all of his people receive the Spirit. This is the covenant and this is what is fulfilled in Christ. This is the mind and plan of God.

So, Old covenant is not referring to writing of the scriptures but Israel failure to work in God's agreement. That is what makes it Old. The writings of the scriptures is what shows us all that transpired within those period. So in it I will see the Old covenant events and also in it I will see Christ explained.

Notice that all of the Apostles teaching were from the writings you called Old.

John 5:39
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and [b]they are they which testify of me [/b]
Like o told you before, when ever you read the word SCRIPTURES from the Bible it simply means the OT writings, no NT writings then. Jesus said, his testimony are in the OT writings. So, can we find the New Covenant in OT writings? Yes but as a promises.


Jesus and his Apostle preached solely from the OT and they preached the following:

- Christ redemption from OT
- Christ death and resurrection from OT
- Spirit of Adoption from OT
- Gift of the Spirit from OT
-Philip preached Christ to the Ethiopian Eunuch from OT alone.
Etc.

Are this not new Covenant realities? Yet preached from OT.

Hence, does the OT still relevant to Christianity today? Yes. Absolutely. You can't even understand the scriptures without the understanding of OT.

Therefore, books in OT must be read as much as those in NT but all in the light of the New Covenant, the Spirit of Christ.

Our disagreement on this issue is not whether or not the new covenant was already prophesied ibefore Christ. That's obvious.
It is simply that you do not agree that there's a difference in the old covenant and the new.

First there are conditions that followed the old covenant viz;
-being a Jew
-becoming circumcised.
-only priests could enter the inner courts.
-the Laws of Moses and the sacrifices that follow.
-tithes,
-Judgment by the hands of elders.
-An eye for an eye, etc

In the new covenant after the promise was fulfilled, all these were scrapped.
-Everyone including Gentiles and Jews are God's people.
-No circumcision needed. Only circumcision of the heart (broken spirit).
-Everyone is a royal priesthood and there's no more physical holy of holies.
-Law of the Spirit only and Christ paid the ultimate sacrifice once and for all.
-Cheerful giving.
-Judgment is of God.
-Forgiveness, etc

Just to mention few.
So the old testament is a background to the new testament. A shadow of what now is in the new covenant. The difference is i.portant that here's how Jesus explained it to Nicodemus and used the great John the baptist of the old covenant to the least in this new covenant.

Matthew 11:11
Truly I tell you, among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet whoever is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

John 3:3-6
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is nborn oagain2 he cannot psee the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born qof water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 rThat which is born of the flesh is sflesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

The differences are so much it makes one wonder if it is the same God of Old testament that is in New testament?

If you still don't see these differences, then we can only agree to disagree.

hoopernikao:
Good morning
You are contradicting yourself now.

Firstly, a covenant is not a tradition or culture. A covenant is an agreement. This can result into cultural modification, likewise a tradition can evolve from it. But note this word again. A COVENANT IS AN AGREEMENT. A covenant is not a process, it's a promise, and agreement which can them take process to fulfil or achieve.

You seems not to get the meaning of that word right.

Let me ask you this:

The covenant God had with Noah is it Old or New?

The covenant God had with Abraham is it Old or New?

Well you do have a point.

So what do the apostles mean by old covenant and new covenant in Jesus Christ?

Mikecold:
If you have an iota of comprehension you would see that the question isn't about the Torah (we all agree it's genuinely correct)

Christianity gifts it's foundation from Torah and have validation/historic proof from the Torah to back it up

Quran/Islam gifts it's foundation from the Torah but can't back it up.

I challenge the both of us to show the validation from the Torah on our respective religion, do you accept my challenge?

I'm not a Muslim though. But I know a couple of Muslims that will gladly accept your challenge.

If the Torah and Quran reject Jesus Christ as Son of God, talkless of being the God. Then it means Christianity is the questionable one.

Even the bible says at the mouth of 2 witnesses the truth is established. Islam and Torah witness the same Truth but Christianity is on its own.

Mikecold:
Abdul, you have a basket for a brain i am beyond your intellectual capacity.

Like you could see i have been having a very deep intellectual exchange with the atheist before you.

He is also far beyond your mental capacity, (why he surrendered is very obvious)

I won't be a part of this your tears shedding and questions evading when ever you put on the spot.

Quran is a pathetic excuse without content created to deflect theology not answer them

If you disparage the Quran then you must also do the same to the Jewish Torah.
Yet Christianity and Islam git their foundation from the Torah.

MaxInDHouse:
This is political!

The Arab world want to take over power from the West, they found out that the nation that served longest as world power in the past was Italy (Rome) and the tool Romans used to keep that position for that long was Catholicism (religion)
So after lots of internal disputes amongst themselves they came to agree that Muhammad whom they themselves exterminated would have been useful to them. HOW?
If all Arabs should embrace the same god instead of each family having it's own god as they've been doing in the past, it will be easier for them to form alliance against the west and they will use Islam (religion) to recruit more fighters to support them.
Muhammad was assassinated because he is imposing the custom of the Jews on them and telling them that their numerous gods are worthless. Before then there was no nation on this planet that's worshiping just one deity except Israel. So they thought he is insulting them by raising the tradition of their enemies against their own, but when they now reconciled and thought of making use of what Muhammad introduced, the bone of contention now is which name will the God of Islam be called?
Of course Muhammad can't call on the name of the God of the Jews "JEHOVAH" in the midst of the enemies of Israel so he can't fabricate any name other than living it as God (Allah)
So Allah simply means God and God is just a title not the name of any specific deity, the name the God of the Hebrews called himself is "JEHOVAH"
If i want to preach and teach an Arabian about my own God now, i'll use the name JEHOVAH but when talking about the title then Allah would be appropriate because Allah simply means God therefore all the deities in the world could be referred to as Allah (god) why the Arabs fought against Muhammad wasn't the name but that there is just one Allah (god) so which Allah (god) should be scrapped amongst several deities that the inhabitants of Mecca worshiped back then and which should be retained? That's what caused the rift between Muhammad and his people not the issue of a specific name!

You're right to point out the fact that Allah simply means God by translation.
Whether that God is the same as Jehovah is a subject of debate.
But I believe even gods know and recognise that there's only one God. Even Apostle Paul corroborates this. Acts 17:23-24
So for the Muslims and Jews to be worshipping that God means their followers are all worshipping the same One God.

Do you know that the name Jehovah only exists in the old testament?
Not once was Jehovah mentioned in the new testament.
Christians now believe God having exalted the name of Jesus even above his own name means that Jesus is the God of Christianity. Philippians 2:9-11

If I'm wrong please don't hesitate to prove me wrong with scriptures.

hoopernikao:
Can i ask you,

When Jesus died and rose, there was not single book of what we called New Testament is written then, So please, what covenant was in operation then, since the New Covenant is not available and the Old is now Old (going by your explanation that books are the covenants)? If you take the writings as the covenant, so were they still under Old covenant even after Jesus resurrection? Bear in mind that the first book of the NT is written 50 years after. So was the covenant suspended within that period that no one has penned down all the events as scriptures?


The scriptures is not a covenant, it is a documents that shows you God's dealing with man. It only documents the covenants which you read today to learn and to know God's purpose for man: Christ.

I am avoiding having to write a long explanation on this,

Let me share an illustration;

Take Nigeria for example, our traditional/indigenous religions had their own laws and practices, they had been living by for ages.

Let's say suddenly an educated traditionalist decides to document these practices iand write them in a book that was published in the year 2020.

Does that mean that traditional religion started in year 2020?
Cos from your explanation, that because the books of the new testament were written 50 years after Christ does not make them new covenant right?


How then do you explain the message of what was documented informing us that the death of Chris ushered in both a new covenant and the Holyspirit dispensation which were not in the old covenant.

Jesus Christ brought the new covenant. John 1:17.
Whether it was documented 1000 years after him, doesn't negate the fact that a new covenant was given through him.

I asked you a question, what does the new covenant mean to you cos I believe your answer to this question will settle this confusion.

hoopernikao:
So, in conclusion,
When you read or see the word covenant in the Bible, it's just part of the dealings of God with man to save and redeem man. It's not referring to writing of the Bible. If you observe the said covenant is always associated to events and explained in events when used.


So you must try to keep your mind away from thinking the Bible is talking about the books of the Bible when you read/hear Old Testament/Covenant or New Testament/Covenant.


You may not agree with the following but it's the truth:
that your (our) knowledge of calling a part of the scriptures old and another part new was actually influenced by translators' segmentation of the Bible into two. If you haven't heard or seen that word before, you will never have such notion nor see it intended in the scriptures if you are given a whole Bible to read. All the texts of the scriptures are clear.

First let me start by reminding you that the present book called the bible was canonised.
However it was canonised to reflect to a great degree the timeline and journey from the Old to the new covenant (testament).

Those who canonised the bible did their research before separating the bibke into Old testament and New testament.

Saying new testament/covenant is no differential from the Old means not only did Jesus' death achieve nothing, but also the early Christians (apostles of the new covenant) were persecuted and martyred by the Jews (custodians of the old covenant).

One major difference between the old testament and the new testament is the Laws of Moses being replaced by the Law of the Spirit.
In fact Apostle Paul in His epistles condemns any bekiever who still practises the laws. He called such accursed. Galatians 3:1-14

At this juncture i believe you should explain what you understand by the new covenant to help me better understand your position cos I really don't see it.

shadeyinka:
Is Allah the same as Jehovah?

Just go to any mosque and shout "Jehovah Allahu Akbar" and see if you are not reduced to minced meat!

Well, Arabic bible translations refer to God (Jehovah) as Allah.

mhmsadyq:
As Muslims, we believe Islam is the religion chosen by the Supreme Being, Allah SWT for Mankind and the jinns.

Islam is the religion of all the Prophets and Messengers of Allah sent to tribes, nations, and peoples from the time of the creation of the first man, Adam AS.

But at some points in time, the true message from Allah usually get lost and in some cases corrupted by men. Therefore, the need to send another Prophet or Messenger as Allah wills.
Allah said this about the father of Faith in Qur'an 3:65 - 67,
[3:65] Āl ‘Imrān-آل عِمْرَان
"یٰۤاَہۡلَ الۡکِتٰبِ لِمَ تُحَآجُّوۡنَ فِیۡۤ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ وَ مَاۤ اُنۡزِلَتِ التَّوۡرٰىۃُ وَ الۡاِنۡجِیۡلُ اِلَّا مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِہٖ ؕ اَفَلَا تَعۡقِلُوۡنَ ﴿۶۵﴾

O People of the Book! Why do you dispute about Ibrahim ([Abraham] i.e., why do you regard him as a Jew or a Christian])? The truth is that the Torah and the Injil ([the Gospel] on which both your religions are based) were sent down after his time. Have you not even (this much) sense?
[3:66] Āl ‘Imrān-آل عِمْرَان
"ہٰۤاَنۡتُمۡ ہٰۤؤُلَآءِ حَاجَجۡتُمۡ فِیۡمَا لَکُمۡ بِہٖ عِلۡمٌ فَلِمَ تُحَآجُّوۡنَ فِیۡمَا لَیۡسَ لَکُمۡ بِہٖ عِلۡمٌ ؕ وَ اللّٰہُ یَعۡلَمُ وَ اَنۡتُمۡ لَا تَعۡلَمُوۡنَ ﴿۶۶﴾

Listen! You are the people who have also been disputing about matters of which you had (but some) knowledge. But why do you dispute about things of which you have no knowledge (at all)? And Allah knows but you do not know.

[3:67] Āl ‘Imrān-آل عِمْرَان
"مَا کَانَ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمُ یَہُوۡدِیًّا وَّ لَا نَصۡرَانِیًّا وَّ لٰکِنۡ کَانَ حَنِیۡفًا مُّسۡلِمًا ؕ وَ مَا کَانَ مِنَ الۡمُشۡرِکِیۡنَ ﴿۶۷﴾

Ibrahim (Abraham) was neither a Jew nor a Christian; he was a (true) Muslim, far detached from all heresy and falsehood. Nor was he one of the polytheist.

Also,
[2:135] Al-Baqarah-الْبَقَرَة
"وَ قَالُوۡا کُوۡنُوۡا ہُوۡدًا اَوۡ نَصٰرٰی تَہۡتَدُوۡا ؕ قُلۡ بَلۡ مِلَّۃَ اِبۡرٰہٖمَ حَنِیۡفًا ؕ وَ مَا کَانَ مِنَ الۡمُشۡرِکِیۡنَ ﴿۱۳۵﴾

And (the People of the Book) say: ‘Become Jews or Christians, then you will be guided aright.’ Say: ‘(Nay,) the truth is that we have embraced the religion of Ibrahim (Abraham) who, far from every falsehood, turned absolutely to Allah alone. And he was not of the polytheists.’

[2:136] Al-Baqarah-الْبَقَرَة
"قُوۡلُوۡۤا اٰمَنَّا بِاللّٰہِ وَ مَاۤ اُنۡزِلَ اِلَیۡنَا وَ مَاۤ اُنۡزِلَ اِلٰۤی اِبۡرٰہٖمَ وَ اِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ وَ اِسۡحٰقَ وَ یَعۡقُوۡبَ وَ الۡاَسۡبَاطِ وَ مَاۤ اُوۡتِیَ مُوۡسٰی وَ عِیۡسٰی وَ مَاۤ اُوۡتِیَ النَّبِیُّوۡنَ مِنۡ رَّبِّہِمۡ ۚ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَیۡنَ اَحَدٍ مِّنۡہُمۡ ۫ۖ وَ نَحۡنُ لَہٗ مُسۡلِمُوۡنَ ﴿۱۳۶﴾

(O Muslims!) Say: ‘We believe in Allah and in that (Book) which has been revealed to us and (also) that which was revealed to Ibrahim (Abraham) and Isma‘il (Ishmael) and Ishaq (Isaac) and Ya‘qub (Jacob) and their children and those (Books) too which were given to Musa (Moses) and ‘Isa (Jesus) and (likewise) which were given to other Prophets by their Lord. We do not make distinction between any of them (in the matter of faith), and we have submitted ourselves to Him alone (the Only, the One God).’

Islam recognises all Prophets and Messengers mentioned in the Bible and the Torah and some that were not mentioned or known by us. Especially, there are 25 were prominently mentioned in the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Islam believe in Isa AS, which i think the Christians call Jesus. But Islam condemns the assertion that he is the begotten Son of God (Allah)

[3:59] Āl ‘Imrān-آل عِمْرَان
"اِنَّ مَثَلَ عِیۡسٰی عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ کَمَثَلِ اٰدَمَ ؕ خَلَقَہٗ مِنۡ تُرَابٍ ثُمَّ قَالَ لَہٗ کُنۡ فَیَکُوۡنُ ﴿۵۹﴾

Surely, the example of ‘Isa (Jesus) in the sight of Allah is the same as that of Adam whom He formed from clay, then said (to him): ‘Be.’ And he became.

[43:59] Al-Zukhruf-الزُّخْرُف
"اِنۡ ہُوَ اِلَّا عَبۡدٌ اَنۡعَمۡنَا عَلَیۡہِ وَ جَعَلۡنٰہُ مَثَلًا لِّبَنِیۡۤ اِسۡرَآءِیۡلَ ﴿ؕ۵۹﴾

He (‘Isa [Jesus]) was only an (exalted) servant whom We blessed with favour. And We made him an example (of Our might) for the Children of Israel.

[19:35] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"مَا کَانَ لِلّٰہِ اَنۡ یَّتَّخِذَ مِنۡ وَّلَدٍ ۙ سُبۡحٰنَہٗ ؕ اِذَا قَضٰۤی اَمۡرًا فَاِنَّمَا یَقُوۡلُ لَہٗ کُنۡ فَیَکُوۡنُ ﴿ؕ۳۵﴾

It is not Allah’s Glory that He should take (to Himself anyone as) a son. Holy and Glorified is He (above this)! When He decrees any matter, He only says to it: ‘Be,’ and it becomes.

The major point of departure between Islam and Christianity is the Sonship of Isa to Allah SWT.
This is a blasphemous statement in the sight of Allah.
[19:88] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"وَ قَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحۡمٰنُ وَلَدًا ﴿ؕ۸۸﴾

And (the disbelievers) say: ‘The Most Kind (Lord) has taken (to Himself) a son.’
[19:89] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"لَقَدۡ جِئۡتُمۡ شَیۡئًا اِدًّا ﴿ۙ۸۹﴾

(O disbelievers!) You have indeed brought most horrible and unusual evil (on your tongues).
[19:90] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"تَکَادُ السَّمٰوٰتُ یَتَفَطَّرۡنَ مِنۡہُ وَ تَنۡشَقُّ الۡاَرۡضُ وَ تَخِرُّ الۡجِبَالُ ہَدًّا ﴿ۙ۹۰﴾

The heavens may just burst at this (fabricated lie) and the earth split asunder and the mountains fall down to pieces,
[19:91] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"اَنۡ دَعَوۡا لِلرَّحۡمٰنِ وَلَدًا ﴿ۚ۹۱﴾

That they have attributed a son to the Most Kind (Lord).
[19:92] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"وَ مَا یَنۡۢبَغِیۡ لِلرَّحۡمٰنِ اَنۡ یَّتَّخِذَ وَلَدًا ﴿ؕ۹۲﴾

And it is not befitting the Glory of the Most Kind (Lord) to take (someone as) a son.
[19:93] Maryam-مَرْيَم
"اِنۡ کُلُّ مَنۡ فِی السَّمٰوٰتِ وَ الۡاَرۡضِ اِلَّاۤ اٰتِی الرَّحۡمٰنِ عَبۡدًا ﴿ؕ۹۳﴾

Whoever is (dwelling) in the heavens and the earth (whether an angel, a jinn or a human being) will appear just as a servant before the Most Kind (Lord).

Wow. This is deep. Thanks for sharing the references too.

What then is your take? Do Muslims and Christians worship the same God though in different ways?

hoopernikao:
Observe properly, that the word covenant was not used loosely as we use it this days.

When that word is used as New/Old in the Bible it is always explained.

Observe the verse you quoted.

HEBREWS 8:6-13
But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.

Verse 6 used the word promises. That means we must trace what that means. When, how, where did God made his promises. At what point in time? Was it an event or a writing or both.

There are two key events in OT that defines God's promises

1. To Abraham
2. To Israelite.

And this promises were firstly seen in events and documented as scriptures. So when the scriptures speaks about old promises, that won't refer to a writings but an event in time that was now documented in writings (scriptures).

E.g The promise to Abraham cannot be called the Book of Genesis but that promise was documented in the book of Genesis, but the book is not a covenant as much as the promise to Abraham was a covenant.


Observe the next verse

For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord.

This explains when and what is the covenant. He said the Old covenant was made: to who?

To fathers of the house of Israel and Judah

Where? Observe what he said below:

day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt.

Very specific.
The covenant as in an event. We can see this events documented in Exodus, Deuteronomy. Note that there is different between documentation of the events and the events itself. He called the events in those period (exodus from Egypt) a covenant. In fact this events wasn't in Genesis, It was documented in Exodus-Deut.

So, the old covenant has a recipient - Those coming from Egypt. In fact it is clear from above that God didn't make the covenant with everyone but specifically "their fathers".


So what is called the new covenant in the scriptures?
Now observe next verse.

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

He didn't say New scriptures. A new covenant, not a writing but a promise, an event of actions and plans. What we have as scriptures will be the explanation of these events


So, Genesis to Malachi documented this covenant, a promise of God made during the Exodus. The documentation which is what we called now the Old Testament (Scriptures) is not the covenant made, but gives us the explanation of what transpired to learn from. The covenant is a promise.

Note that God firstly made a covenant to Abraham. You can't called that covenant book of Genesis just because it was documented in Genesis. The covenant with Abraham is an event, a promise which we can read and learn from Genesis. Same with the promise he made to Israel, it's a covenant, now documented in the books we called OT today.

Lastly observe the verse below.

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.

So what is the new covenant? It's not Mathew to Revelation but the covenant of the Spirit in Christ Jesus.

Where can we find this documented? All through the scriptures, not just what we called NT

When was it fulfilled? In the events of his death, burial, resurrection and the giving of the Spirit.

Where is this event documented for us to read? In Matthew to Revelation.

So you must know the distinction between events called covenant and the writings that documented the events.

---

So going back to where we stated.

The word covenant was never used loosely in the scriptures and was never used to mean the writings of the scriptures. The idea of calling a part of the scriptures Old Testament was influenced by translators who trying to help in reading of the Bible decided to demarcate into two and called one Old and another New. It was never from the scriptures and this have not helped many in proper bible study and understanding.

Infact, it is funny how translator called Matthew - John New Testament, when the scriptures shows clearly that there cant be a new testament when the testator is still alive. Jesus was with humanity in all the 4 gospels, so why is it called Old? But the reality is this is not even the issue, the Bible was never referred to as old in any part or in full.

Doesnt the bible contains the documentation of the events of the old covenant? Yes
Is any part of the bible now become old covenant or testament? No.

The scriptures are scriptures, in its completeness we find God's work in Christ for man, in man and through man.
So, that means, no part of this must be treated as old or new, as the word of God are always new and abide forever.

I find your writings very well articulated and presented.
However, it does not cloud my judgment not to see the truth or lies in them.

At this point, I really wish to understand your point, and i hope you won't disappoint. (just couldn't resist the rhyme.lol)
You seem to disagree with the writer in Hebrews if your submission is that there is no difference between the old and the new testament/covenant.
Regardless of the documentation, do you believe there was an old testament after which Christ ushered in a new testament?

I ask cos it would seem that the whole purpose of the birth, death and resurrection of Christ wasn't even necessary since the old covenant is to be continued.

I believe you need to be less closed-minded in order to both acknowledge and appreciate that the birth, death and resurrection of Christ paved the way for a new covenant. The more pertinent question is whether the old covenant was abolished or parts of it yet remains in the new.

Mikecold:
(1). I told you there is freewill in heaven, when God cast Satan down he ended the rebillion that Satan orchestrated in heaven (the exact reason why punishment in its is a dissentient for future violators.)

When souls who lived on Earth go to heaven, they don't think of violating heaven principles even with their free will because they have tested the seductions of the world and can't fall to the end of Satan (btw you can't escape all the temptation of the devil here just only to fall when in God's presence)

(2). A child is without knowledge they go to heaven if they die, not an adult that knows the difference between Good and Evil (Adam and Eve were told the consequences of their actions that's why they fell for the devil promises)

(3). What is changed in my explanation of regret, you regret simply because you are disappointed, you don't regret when things go well, disappointment brings regret (is that an entirely new explanation to the word?)

You are disappointed either because of your error or someone's else's and in this case it's man own error.

(4). Adam and Eve weren't kids, they were given everything to keep them comfortable, they were told the consequences of their actions, (you can blame God if they weren't told).

The tree in question wasn't some knive a kid runs into on the ground, it had a specific location including someone having to take the pain of climbing or stretching just to eat from the fruit (you can't carefully do all these and claim innocent)

(5). Satan can not die as you put it, it has everlasting existence (it has an everlasting disconnect from God's mercy which is a torment on its own, this was the state he wished for man)

Unfortunately for him man had not yet the tree of life like him so man could still be redeemed.

Death to man was attached to the tree of knowledge he ate from (from day one)

(6). God is not just a creator, he is also a judge, he can't be seen to be unfair in this role whether friend or not.

If God boasts in job and the devil is confident he would disappoint him, should God set aside this test from the devil?

would the devil not call God an unbiased God that sheilds him from testing them, did Satan not test God's own son.

(7). Jesus didn't come to abolish the law but to establish it (we still follow the obey your parents, no adultery, etc law)

8. God trusted his creatures enough to give them free will, there would be no concept of that same trust if he didn't trust them to keep his word as he commanded

Leaving them was a part of the freedom the freewill came with (because giving them freewill and gagging on it does not indicate trust which the freewill came with)

He didn't abadon them per-say he always came in the cool of the day.

I have taken pains to point every thing out, remove bias, if you assimilate it even from a theology perspective this God is perfect in everysense

Youre sharing your own opinion.
As a biblical scholar, it would help if you had biblical references for each of your point.

hoopernikao:
And then be persecuted like Paul

How else can a Christian share in the glory of Christ except through persecution? Lol.

The challenge is we have seen God continue to prosper nominal Christians that devout Christians start to question if the persecution route is worth it.
Trust me, there was a time I was ready to go to Okija Shine, Sambisa forest and even outside the shores of Nigeria just to be propagate the gospel and even be martyred for his name sake.

But with time I realised I was no different from an extremist Muslim who is likewise prepared to be blown up to further the Islamic cause.

AkinwaleJJ:
Your friend, profile name starts with M!

Wow. Maximus? Cool. Now I can connect the dots better.

jantman:
@Myer
If I will be honest with you, Christian and Muslim don't serve the same God.

Muslim wants to serve the one and only true God but their religion is a deception and doctrine of Satan. The foundation of Islam is faulty

I remember I came accross article about the foundation of Islam. I was told that the father of the prophet Mohammed is known as Abdhalla who was worshiping a deity called (Allah)

Abdhallah was a slave of a deity, an Idol called (allah)
Abdhallah gave birth to a son named Mohammed who continue from his father legacy and became the founder of Islam.

Mohammed became very powerful and start conquering nations and when he does he will introduce Islam to those nation he has vaptured through war, that is how Islam spread all over middle east

From experience when a man worship Idols, even after his death, one of his sons must continue the father's legacy as a priest to this deity.

@Myer
I am an introvert and I think a lot and can write an article and explain it to you more better but i just have to answer you in a hurry

I hope you perceived what Islam is all about?

If I get you right, Allah decided to create a story in the likeness of the Christian God?

Well, I don't know where you get your information from but I can assure you it's just an opinion.

azmanaty02:
Fulani cow is sweeter than yoruba cow

You this racist bustard.

Kobojunkie:
Did you know that all knowledge whether Good or Evil, belongs to God?

Did you know that there is only one Spirt of Inspiration who inspires all creativity?

Did you know that even the secular songs some love to hate are also inspired?

Did you know that God gave man no command as regards what music he can sing or listen to or even how to take a shower, or grow his beard or even bath?

Do you know that when you bend your mind to obeying the rules of ordinary men you shackle yourself to their laws and their rules, not God's.

Which denomination do you belong to?

HellVictorinho:
Are you saying Jesus is not the son?
If he is not the son,then who is?
If YHWH has no son,then it means Christians worship a God different from YHWH.

It could mean you worship the same God. Just his messenger Jesus was not fully accepted.
However the Jews only accept Christ as a Messiah and Prophet as their God never promised to have a son. Rather he promised that the Seed (Son) of the Woman would crush the head of the serpeant.
Likewise Muslims accept Jesus as a prophet of immense calling and signs and wonders. But God cannot have a son. Rather man can only be his servant.

But I understand that Christianity is hinged on Jesus being the Son of God. But if Jesus was a Jew then Judaism and Christianity worship the same God. QED.
And by inference Muslims and Christians worship the same God too.

jantman:
@Myer
Are you a Muslim?
Are you a Christian?
Or
Are you a member of the body of Christ?

Don't be concern about about the affairs of others. Be concern about yourself because on Judgment day you will only answer about yourself

Love everyone

True.
But while we are still here, can you simply answer the question, giving your reasons an well.

HellVictorinho:
How can God be the father of Jesus and not be the father of Jesus at the same time
How does that make any sense?

Remember God (YHWH) has been God even before the birth of Jesus Christ.
The Jews including Jesus Christ himself worshipped this God (YHWH).
The Jews simply parted ways with Jesus when he claimed to be the Son of God.

AkinwaleJJ:
Just love reading, chatting and sharing romance stories, i'm JW and married to a Nairalander (JW too), i'm sure you know my man very well, he's always on the religion section!

Didn't know you're a lady. So who's the lucky mystery man?

jantman:
@Myer
If I will be honest with you, Christian and Muslim don't serve the same God.

Muslim wants to serve the one and only true God but their religion is a deception and doctrine of Satan. The foundation of Islam is faulty

I remember I came accross article about the foundation of Islam. I was told that the father of the prophet Mohammed is known as Abdhalla who was worshiping a deity called (Allah)

Abdhallah was a slave of a deity, an Idol called (allah)
Abdhallah gave birth to a son named Mohammed who continue from his father legacy and became the founder of Islam.

Mohammed became very powerful and start conquering nations and when he does he will introduce Islam to those nation he has vaptured through war, that is how Islam spread all over middle east

From experience when a man worship Idols, even after his death, one of his sons must continue the father's legacy as a priest to this deity.

@Myer
I am an introvert and I think a lot and can write an article and explain it to you more better but i just have to answer you in a hurry

I hope you perceived what Islam is all about?

The irony of all this 8s no Muslim has come on this head to say that Christians and Muslims worship the different Gods only Christians.

Cos it's even somewhere in the Quran where it says Muslims should learn from Christians in the ways of righteousness.
Muslims just like the Jews only reject the fact that Jesus is Son of God and also the idea of the Trinity of God.

Allah simply means God. So as long as Christians, Jews and Muslims are worshipping the one and only God, by inference they're all worshipping the same God albeit in different ways.

It is only human religion that divides and makes Muslims and Christians not want to have anything in common.

kingxsamz:
Lol. Even in the bible the god of the old testament and new testament are clearly different, talk more of between two religions.

Interesting.
Please shed more light

hoopernikao:
There are more work on ground than online Sir, especially in silencing the voice and influence of the pandemic.

Am sure you have been good.

On this we certainly agree.
So much noise online.
The world yearns for the word of life, not words of argument and egomania as is common on here.lol

Your absence was truly felt. Hope you brought a fresh doze of anointing like the Apostle Paul after his return from Arabia.

hoopernikao:
Absolutely a continuation. All that is written in New is taken directly from the Old. No new revelation. Until you see the scriptures as a whole and start reading and understanding it as such there are alot that won't be understood.

Note
No writer of the new testament has a Bible study beyond reading the old. When you read the word scriptures in New Testament, that solely refer to the OT (Genesis - Malachi) in their time not 4 gospels or epistles, yet they communicated all you read today in NT from it.

Paul read OT and taught salvation, faith in Christ. Jesus read OT and taught redemption, grace and God's mercy. Same as other writers. Their teaching is from old.

So, until you start seeing what they saw in OT and start understanding what those who heard them understood, you will not have full appreciation of the whole scripture one.

What does the phrase New testament mean?
Let me rather answer you with scriptures.

HEBREWS 8:6-13
But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.

For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. Because finding fault with them, He says: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord.

For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more.”

In that He says, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.


John 13:34
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

Oyebaba10:
But Islam does not lead to salvation

And Christianity leads to salvation?

Salvation is relative.
I guess to a Christian only hope of heaven is seen as salvation.
To a Muslim, submitting to God's will, being saved from sinful ways, spiritual attacks, having a successful life and the hope of heaven is salvation.

So a Muslim would tell you Islam leads to salvation.

ewelike98925:
The xtians worship yahweh, the muslims worship allah. However, there is only one God i.e God the father, who in his infinite kindness sent his only begotten son to die for me and you.

How has that sacrifice differentiated you from a Muslim?
A lot of Muslims are even more christiane than Christians.

Saintmary:
Why do people wait until after death before celebrating a person.
Such an amazing person.

Unfortunate reality.
Wish she was celebrated while she was yet living.
She truly was a non-cape wearing super hero.
Saving the lives of bachelors and manchelors everyday.lool

hoopernikao:
.
Bro, you still have somethings mixed up. And I feel that is what is informing your actions and thought.

Note that
1. Salvation in Christ or Christianity never promised a life without temptation. Temptation is not sin, and the fact that you can be tempted shows your humanity. What Christianity gives you is strength, hope and leading to be able to overcome this. Will some fall in this? Yes. Is it right? No. Can I live without being tempted? No. As much as you have desires, temptation will abound. Yet the scriptures provide a way out of this always.

2. Christianity or Salvation never promised you a life free of challenges. Anywhere that is preached is a false gospel. In fact it promised you a more challenging life for the gospel sake. So, can I prevent challenges? No. Do I have the power to overcome these challenges? Yes.

---

So, you must firstly know in reality the gospel you recover and believed. This days there are many ANOTHER GOSPEL flying around. A proper understanding of what the Bible teaches and offers is key.

Of course I'm not speaking merely of life's challenges, that's a given also.
What I mean is as regards struggles with sin.
A Christian just like other non-christians is commiting one sin or the other.
Otherwise how do you explain Nigeria having almost the highest number of Christians in the world yet the most corrupt country in the world.