Not a Sermon only a Thought

Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Interesting given that only Christian preachers ask people if they found Jesus yet. 

seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

No running from me, your not worth my time nothing constructive come from you go talk to Turner and Hawkins and let me know if you come up with an answer to:

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

No running from me, your not worth my time nothing constructive come from you go talk to Turner and Hawkins and let me know if you come up with an answer to:

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

I always thought that religious fanatics could overcome any fear with their faith. Are you too fake to respond to my questions? Are you afraid the answers will show the defects in your beliefs?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:
Keith posted:
skeldon_man posted:

Ksaz and Brother Keith, I am extending an invitation to both of you to watch "FINDING JESUS" on CNN this coming Sunday. Don't forget now, there might be opposing views, so keep an open mind Brother Keith.

I was not aware He was lost.

Stay tuned and keep an open mind. Didn't his disciples steal his body and claimed that he was ascended into heaven? Or was that the UFO and it's crew that Ezekiel saw? Could it be that Jesus was sent to us by an advanced civilization? Who knows brother Keith?

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

It does nothing have changed. If you would like to entertain your partner  question go right ahead. I don't have time for foolishness maybe you do. 

antabanta posted:

I think this man Keith is nuff mouth - he gone and hide from me again and hoping that Seignet will answer on his behalf.

But I will answer you, tonight. After I talked to God. I will converse with Him. His wisdom is infinite. And the Angels are out, full force in the Third Hour with dreams and prophecies. At 3.00 am I will answer you. I hope the Angels mek yuh dream about yuh queries.   

However, whatever I say will never be acceptable by you. I know so.

But, I will interject my two bit. So nah fuh waste meh time, I asking that the Divine consult wid yuh in the dreams. Dat way, meh answers could clear the air, 

antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:
antabanta posted:
seignet posted:
antabanta posted:
Keith posted:

I didn't expect you to recall it since what's being display by you is nugatory. So tell me, in a universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

So our previous exchange was not too mundane to be forgotten by you then?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Also, my previous questions:

Did God incited Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael?
Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

The Middle-East was known for its false gods. Reading the Bible in a historical context, that can be easily ascertain.

Abraham was supposed to wait for the miraculous birth of his son, promised to him by God. Impatient, he did not wait. So he got a carnal son. 

When Sarai passed child bearing age, she concieved Isaac. The same can be said of the mother of John the Baptist.

The Jews are the chosen people to carry the message of the Almighty God. He made them distinct from all other nations. In them, The Christ came to the masses of the world. That is God's plan since he created the world. And he nutured a race of people to do his bidding. God is a warrior, too.

Promethius(sp), the Titan, claimed he had compassion for mankind, so he took fire from the alter of Zeus and gave it to mankind. Fire was the medium by which mankind forged their civilizations. The Titan (Satan), views of God's creation, animals had fur and hair to shelter them and birds has feathers. But man, he was naked.

I believe, Homer views are true, However, he fictionalized the facts and characters. He was a story teller.

Man's intelligence is from God.

Atrificial Intelligence of the future is somewhat like the demons that dominanted the ancient world. The enslavement of mankind.

 

Is the determination of false gods arbitrary?

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

What makes you think that God is responsible for the intelligence of mankind?

Did God incite Abraham to abandon his older son, Ishmael? Why would a benevolent god instigate a rift in an innocent man's family?

Very simple questions.

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

Run Mr Keith, Run!

No running from me, your not worth my time nothing constructive come from you go talk to Turner and Hawkins and let me know if you come up with an answer to:

A universe without God or immortality, how is mankind ultimately different from a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs?

I always thought that religious fanatics could overcome any fear with their faith. Are you too fake to respond to my questions? Are you afraid the answers will show the defects in your beliefs?

Your characterization of me is fallacious. You failed to realize that you lack substance therefore I don't intend to waste time on you or anyone else with your nonsensical questions.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

It does nothing have changed. If you would like to entertain your partner  question go right ahead. I don't have time for foolishness maybe you do. 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
 

Read the book you believe and let us know what it said, perhaps ksazma could tell you if they did from him holy book.

Not so long ago you claimed that the Bible has all the answers. What happened.

It does nothing have changed. If you would like to entertain your partner  question go right ahead. I don't have time for foolishness maybe you do. 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

Don't talk about things you have no understanding of. Focus on the book you believe in. I warned you about throwing brick at glass building and taking the speck out of your eyes first. 

It's pathetic to see the level you have stooped to now. Be careful. 

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

Don't talk about things you have no understanding of. Focus on the book you believe in. I warned you about throwing brick at glass building and taking the speck out of your eyes first. 

It's pathetic to see the level you have stooped to now. Be careful. 

Which part of what I wrote above demonstrate a lack of understanding of what I wrote? You seem to be trying desperately to find a place to hide by seeking to bring up others books. Shows how unprepared you were to handle the proliferation of your faith. And I wouldn't even bother to point out how much I have managed to tamper with your persona, attitude and behavior. You once said something about the devil and I. Looks like the devil has taken over your soul. Thought you were so deeply grounded in your faith in Jesus to avoid becoming the victim you have become. But don't despair. You are not the only one. Religious people usually end up like you did because they put their trust in people/gods that are powerless.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
 

Are you aware that the King James Version of the Bible was revised in 1952 and then again in 1971 and on both of those occasions large portions were thrown out and put back with some completely being left out of unceremoniously moved to the footnotes and out of the text? Are you aware that many Biblical scholars don't support the resurrection as an actual event? Now that Paul has stated that if Christ hasn't resurrected, then Christians' faith is in vain. How does that work in light of the ancient documents not supporting the resurrection?

Don't talk about things you have no understanding of. Focus on the book you believe in. I warned you about throwing brick at glass building and taking the speck out of your eyes first. 

It's pathetic to see the level you have stooped to now. Be careful. 

Which part of what I wrote above demonstrate a lack of understanding of what I wrote? You seem to be trying desperately to find a place to hide by seeking to bring up others books. Shows how unprepared you were to handle the proliferation of your faith. And I wouldn't even bother to point out how much I have managed to tamper with your persona, attitude and behavior. You once said something about the devil and I. Looks like the devil has taken over your soul. Thought you were so deeply grounded in your faith in Jesus to avoid becoming the victim you have become. But don't despair. You are not the only one. Religious people usually end up like you did because they put their trust in people/gods that are powerless.

Are you that shallow, I am aware of your incompetence but why display it everyday. You graduated from contradiction to the rewritten and omission of chapters/scriptures from the Bible. 

What weakness you have shown here time after time by deflect and dodging questions and raising new question to side track the audience. 

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear; I just need a Yes/no answer then we can jump to your other topic/questions so I can point out more of your incompetence.

Have a great weekend. 

PS: I never call you a devil, your actions are of his nature but I never put that label on you. You care to prove otherwise?

Keith posted:
 

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son.

Then the Bible was erroneous to state that God told Abraham to take his ONLY son, Isaac. Either God was confused or the writer was. So who really was the writer of that mistake? Moses, Ezra or ........... 

Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is. At no time in Abraham's life was Isaac ever Abraham's ONLY son.

Bible scholars speak about interpolation in the Bible. They say that it is matter NOT in the manuscripts that were ADDED to the Bible. Bible apologists seek some refuge in claiming that they are only added to clarify the text. The mere fact that words are added to the text is a demonstration of the text not being wholesome anymore because normal readers of the Bible can't differentiate what is interpolation and what is not. The word Isaac in the passage in question is an interpolation as it is not necessary for God to identify Abraham's ONLY son as there is no other son to differentiate him from. You can swallow whatever you wish as you are free to believe whatever you wish. That is your right. I have my rights also.

You pull anyone off the street and tell them that Abraham's first son Ishmael was born when Abraham was 86 years old and his second son was born when he was 99 years old and ask them when would Abraham has only one son and everyone you ask will say, 'between 86 and 99 years old when he had only Ishmael. That is logical. The mumbo jumbo that you learn from that ministry can't match that logic with any other argument especially the one about if someone is in a person's sight.

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

What audience are you thinking about. Do you really think people come here for your sermon?

Regarding your "here is what I started above" bit, which part of my "Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is" didn't you understand?

About coherence, observe that I write MOSTLY in my own words while you MOSTLY cut and paste other peoples' materials so you are in no position to assess another person's writings.

Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

Ishmael was recorded for a particular reason. Perhaps, to divide the people. 

God who knows and sees everything doan mek mistakes.

Ishmael mother was Egyptian. One would think, she would have taken him back to Egypt. For some unknown reason, it has been cited that Ishmael fathered the Arab people. I doan think he did, bcz at the time Abraham migrtaed from Ur, the whole area was somewhat civilized and people travelled around in the region.

It has been stated the man from Mecca is a direct descendant of Ishmael. How that was determined was not explained in details.

Bible just briefly mentioned Ishmael.

The man from Mecca was very influential among his tribe. He travelled extensively with his uncle with trading caravans, thereby expanding his knowledge . He was trustworthy and respected. He was well read.

By 600CE, the Christians had written extensively about God, The Apostle Paul, a Jew and a Rabi cited many times the connection between God and Christ. In doing so, the lineage of Christ was established. During the period of 600CE, Arabia was rich in trade and they were a sophisticated people. Is like the Middle-Class of India or China.

At the time, when Abraham took Isaac to be slaughtered at Mount Moriah, Abraham thought nothing much of it. It was a common practice in that particular region at the time. Abraham was surrounded by that culture. The line that divided the True God and the False gods was veiled. Satan did all the things that appeared to be righteous.

We have the same situation today, the God of Jews has be declared the same as Allah by American Preachers. The veil is there again. It is worshipper of Allah who declaring the difference in the beliefs.

The man from Mecca revealed he was transported from a mosque in Mecca to Mount Moriah where he ascended into Heaven. His experiences, very simiar to Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah and Jesus, each levitated to heaven. Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah and Jesus was embraced by Yahweh for their righteousness. The man from Mecca, now with a following of his tribemen had declared his special visitation. Just like the other righteous people, favor was bestowed.

BY being a descendant of Ishmael, transported from Mount Moriah-the place of the sacrificial rock, somebody decided to change the accounts of the Bible, deeming it lacking in tranparency and declared Ishmael to be scarifical son. 

In the Book of Enoch, I read what will appen to those who change God's words. The man from Mecca had to experience and witness the same things as Enoch, Abraham, Isaiah and Jesus. Enoch left for us his experiences. 

Righteous peoe are extremely careful wah dem write and declare with the mouth and tongue dat God gave dem.

 

 

seignet posted:
 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

 

When people talk stupidness, they should be careful to cover all their tracks.

Below is the story of Judah, Tamar and their two illegitimate sons. One of those ILLIGITIMATE sons, Phares is recorded by Matthew as Jesus' forefather.

At what point was Hager ever referred to as a prostitute? Yet this God of the Bible inspired its writers to record Judah's two sons which he got after screwing his daughter in law on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute. What is with these Biblical characters? Rueben was screwing his step mother on the rooftop.

But that God who sees and knows everything and doesn't make mistakes couldn't find another forefather for his son Jesus.

Tamar and Judah

 
Judah and Tamar,

After Shelah had grown up, Judah became a widower. After Judah mourned the death of his wife, he planned on going to Timnah to shear his sheep. Upon hearing this news, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and immediately went to Enaim which was en route to Judah's destination. Upon arriving at Enaim, Judah saw the woman but did not recognize her as Tamar because of the veil she wore over her face. Thinking she was a prostitute, he requested her services. Tamar's plan was to become pregnant by this ruse in order to bear a child in Judah's line, because Judah had not given her to his son Shelah. So she played the part of a prostitute and struck a deal with Judah for a goat with a security deposit of his staff, seal, and cord. When Judah was able to have a goat sent to Enaim, in order to collect his staff and seal, the woman was nowhere to be found and no one knew of any prostitute in Enaim. (Genesis 38:12–23)

Three months later, Tamar was accused of prostitution on account of her pregnancy. Upon hearing this news, Judah ordered that she be burned to death. Tamar sent the staff, seal, and cord to Judah with a message declaring that the owner of these items was the man who had made her pregnant. Upon recognizing his security deposit, Judah released Tamar from her sentence. Tamar's place in the family and Judah's posterity secured, she gives birth to twins, Perez and Zerah. Their birth is reminiscent of the birth of Rebekah's twin sons. The midwife marks Zerah's hand with a scarlet cord when it emerges from the womb first, but Perez is born first.[4] Perez is identified in the Book of Ruth as the ancestor of King David. (Ruth 4:18–22) The Genesis narrative also makes a note that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar. (Genesis 38:24–30)

 

Matthew 1King James Version (KJV)

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

What audience are you thinking about. Do you really think people come here for your sermon?

Regarding your "here is what I started above" bit, which part of my "Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is" didn't you understand?

About coherence, observe that I write MOSTLY in my own words while you MOSTLY cut and paste other peoples' materials so you are in no position to assess another person's writings.

Am I getting under your skin, lighten up. Thanks for pointing out my typo I don't usually reread my statement and beside my smartphone love to correct what I intend on saying. I'm sure you never had that problem.

You lack understanding b/c you failed to see when God was addesssing Abraham, Isaac was the ONLY son in Abraham presence at that moment where he abode; Hagar and Ishmael were left in the desert. 

Therefore, when God said, 'thy only son', He's referring to the only one left in the house. I known this is a bit too much for you to swallow b/c at some point the issue will arise on whether it was Isaac/Ishmael that was the promise son. 

In the Bible as you know it clearly stated whom Abraham was to take to sacrifice. On the other hand that book of yours would left you in suspense and confusion.

I hope this clarify things for you and the audience, yes audience, as naive you might be people do stop by to see how incompetent you are on a daily basis. But then again it will never be clear for you it's in your nature to be critical and push your own agenda and change subjects as we have seen time and again.

You are getting boring, I'm tired of being repetitive with you.....this is me dropping the phone...I am out for now. Enjoy your weekend, try not to ruin what repetition you have left.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
Keith posted:

Now your statements above is incoherent I guess it due to your incompetence and ability to read. Since you missed it let me clarify it again. I am not asking about Abraham age when who was born, I care less about that and I guess the audience also do.  

Here is what I started above:

"Was Ishmael present in Abraham sight when God asked him to, 'take thy son'"? YES/NO? For the record Ishmael never stop being Abraham son. Now that we have that clear;"

Stick to the script dude I hope that was clear enough. 

What audience are you thinking about. Do you really think people come here for your sermon?

Regarding your "here is what I started above" bit, which part of my "Your nonsense about whether Ishmael was present in Abraham's sight does not justify a response except to demonstrate how nonsensical it is" didn't you understand?

About coherence, observe that I write MOSTLY in my own words while you MOSTLY cut and paste other peoples' materials so you are in no position to assess another person's writings.

Am I getting under your skin, lighten up. Thanks for pointing out my typo I don't usually reread my statement and beside my smartphone love to correct what I intend on saying. I'm sure you never had that problem.

You lack understanding b/c you failed to see when God was addesssing Abraham, Isaac was the ONLY son in Abraham presence at that moment where he abode; Hagar and Ishmael were left in the desert. 

Therefore, when God said, 'thy only son', He's referring to the only one left in the house. I known this is a bit too much for you to swallow b/c at some point the issue will arise on whether it was Isaac/Ishmael that was the promise son. 

In the Bible as you know it clearly stated whom Abraham was to take to sacrifice. On the other hand that book of yours would left you in suspense and confusion.

I hope this clarify things for you and the audience, yes audience, as naive you might be people do stop by to see how incompetent you are on a daily basis. But then again it will never be clear for you it's in your nature to be critical and push your own agenda and change subjects as we have seen time and again.

You are getting boring, I'm tired of being repetitive with you.....this is me dropping the phone...I am out. Enjoy your weekend, try not to ruin what repetition you have left.

You don't have the ability to get under my skin dude. I am not a religious hack. That aside, the rest of what you wrote does not make any more sense here than it did before.

ksazam base on my observation during the course of our discussions by far the majority of your statements are either based on ignorance, or are made against better knowledge or at best depend on information selected in a very biased way. I want to credit Andrew for providing the following information, I was reminded that I didn't address the statement concerning the many version of the Bible.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the book "The Light" by al-Haj Sultan Hafiz Abdul (revised by Maulana Syed Zia-ud-Din Ahmad Gilani) we are told that the synoptic writers (i.e. the three recorders of the Gospel that are more historically orientated and as such are rather similar in comparison to the fourth recorder, John, who looks at the events from a more elevated position) of the Gospel are Paul, Luke, Matthew and John. Actually there are only three; John's part of the Gospel is the exception; and Paul did not write an account of the Gospel at all! The "synoptic", as every Christian of even rudimentary learning knows, are: Matthew, Mark and Luke.

Christians rightfully look at "learned men" like this with suspicion, for they cannot make an acceptable contribution. We find it, however, extremely tragic that millions of Muslims get their sole information about the Bible from such uninformed or dishonest men, who build their arguments entirely on one-sided, sifted and selected knowledge, or who argue against better knowledge.

We must, however, hasten to add that by no means all Muslims argue in this rather base spirit. We shall confine our analysis primarily to one book, which is typical in its anti-Christian stance, is relevant to our situation, and is reasonably comprehensive.

We are told, however, that

"What used to be the word of God, has been so adulterated by human hands, that the word of God is hardly distinguishable from the word of man. In some places we do still find a glimmer of the truth that Jesus taught - the gems of divine wisdom that he uttered for the good of his people - but these are few and far between in the jungles of interpolations and contradictions with which the Bible is dense ... Christianity, as we all know, is founded on BLIND BELIEF, where rational thinking plays no part whatever ... It is admitted by the most learned men in the Hebrew language, that the present English version of the Old Testament contains at least 100,000 errors (this would amount to approximately three errors in every verse. G.N.) ... It is not known for certain who in fact wrote any of the books of the Old Testament ... Christians themselves are in disagreement as to what books are inspired."

It is alleged that practically all versions of the Bible have differed from one another and no-one knows yet which is right.

Again and again Christians are asked why there are so many versions. Muslims are surprised to hear that these versions are nothing other than different translations of the same original documents. The 'Authorized' or 'King James Version' dates back to the year A.D. 1611. With the changing of a living language a revision became necessary. In addition to that, many more manuscripts had since been found. Some verses were contained in some of these manuscripts, but not in others (see pp. 17ff.). These texts appear in italics in the 'Revised Versions'. To grasp the extent of these passages in relation to the whole text it ought to be said that besides two portions of 12 verses each (Nos. 5. and 6. on pp. 19-20) and two verses which are omitted for being repetitions (Mark 9:44 and 46 are repeated by vs.48), eight sentences or portions thereof (4) without any bearing on the message or meaning of the text are in question. This makes out 0.1% of the 7959 verses of the New Testament!

Some translations are aimed at great accuracy for the scholar; others are in a popular style avoiding less common words or phrases, catering for the young or less educated reader who is interested in the biblical story and its teaching rather than in theological concepts. The message and content of all is much more identical than the different translations of the Qur'an (i.e. Yusuf Ali, Dawood, Marmaduke Pickthall, George Sale, Rodwell, Arberry etc.).

"Although an extravagant claim is put forward by Bible Societies and other fanatics, that the Bible is the most read book in the world, the contrary is true."

The intimate knowledge claimed by Muslims concerning these things perplexes us. We note, however, that there is little or no substantiation for these claims. The "best known" Bible scholars and commentators referred to are men who are totally obscure personalities.

The fact that Islam has never tolerated textual criticism of the Qur'an, makes it easy for Muslims to assume that all theologians that practice the "higher (or formal) criticism", (not to be confused with textual criticism!) must surely give a true reflection of the Bible. That this is not so, is common knowledge, for "higher criticism" is based on philosophical speculations and makes for arbitrary statements, very often with no Biblical foundation. Speculative theology in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries has created vast numbers of claims and speculations, which were neither Biblical nor ever substantiated and were never taken seriously by Christians. To draw material from such theology puts the Bible in a totally false light.

Muslims, however, have concluded that:

"The Bible was once upon a time the word of God"

and that:

"the present Bible can never by any stretch of imagination be called the inspired word of God"

and that:

"faith demands total allegiance to the Bible with its faults, absurdities, everything. Reason, on the other hand, is loath to accept matters that constitute an insult to the human intelligence."

Muslims also ask, referring to the Authorized Version, Revised Version and others,

"What need has the Word of God to go through so many versions? Our reason says, that the true Word of God should have remained unaltered, uncorrupted, unrevised, exactly as it was revealed to Christ."

We have to stop for a moment to consider these allegations.

First of all, the Word of God was not revealed to Jesus. He IS the revelation of God and He IS the Word of God. That is even supported by the Qur'an (Surah 4:171 and 3:45,59).

Then we would have to ask the categorical question: WHEN, WHERE And by WHOM was the Bible changed? Even the Qur'an bears witness that the Torah and the Gospel were definitely in existence during Mohammed's time (pp. 5-6). It goes against the facts to claim that the Bible was changed thereafter.

The Qur'an claims to be sent to guard the former revelations (Surah 5:47-51) and states explicitly that the Torah and Gospel are revelation. That means they came from God and are consequently His Word. The Qur'an also states strongly that no one can change the Words of God (Surah 6:34 and 10:64).

The writings of the New Testament were composed in a certain context of history and time, more than 500 years earlier than the Qur'anic writings, and up to 1,500 years after those of the Old Testament. Unlike Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, Arabic has remained a spoken language greatly influenced by the Qur'an to the present time. Hebrew experienced an interruption as a living language for about 1,500 years, during the time of the Diaspora, and Aramaic is no longer a living language at all. Research work in this century particularly, has greatly expanded our knowledge of Hebrew and has helped solve the language difficulty. This, as well as the inevitable ageing of every language (just try to read a book written 200 years ago) has made it necessary to revise existing translations of the Bible periodically to make the text true to the living language again.

To a Christian the need to read or recite Scripture or prayers in their original (language) makes no sense. Basically we are interested in the content of the message and not in the mechanics of the original. We deem it highly unlikely that the average Christian will manage to gain a knowledge of the original language(s) of the Bible equal to that of the highly qualified teams of linguists that do our translations. Besides that, we firmly believe that God understands us in our language when we worship, praise Him or speak to Him in prayer.

We also cannot subscribe to the Muslim view that the inspired character of a prophetic utterance is suspect when one cannot precisely determine the author. Ultimately the prophet or writer of an inspired message is just a tool in God's hand. If we seek to establish the authenticity of a letter, we do not make this dependent on our knowledge of the make and locality of the pen as long as we are sure that the message is genuine.

The charge that there are 100,000 errors in the Old Testament is too absurd even to need an answer, and the statement, that the Christian faith is essentially blind belief, throws poor light on the information at the disposal of the writer.

Within the framework of a book like this, it is obviously impossible to deal with all claims made against the Bible. There are, however some that are more prominent than others and we shall have to consider these first."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ksazma posted:
seignet posted:
 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

 

When people talk stupidness, they should be careful to cover all their tracks.

Below is the story of Judah, Tamar and their two illegitimate sons. One of those ILLIGITIMATE sons, Phares is recorded by Matthew as Jesus' forefather.

At what point was Hager ever referred to as a prostitute? Yet this God of the Bible inspired its writers to record Judah's two sons which he got after screwing his daughter in law on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute. What is with these Biblical characters? Rueben was screwing his step mother on the rooftop.

But that God who sees and knows everything and doesn't make mistakes couldn't find another forefather for his son Jesus.

Tamar and Judah

 
Judah and Tamar,

After Shelah had grown up, Judah became a widower. After Judah mourned the death of his wife, he planned on going to Timnah to shear his sheep. Upon hearing this news, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and immediately went to Enaim which was en route to Judah's destination. Upon arriving at Enaim, Judah saw the woman but did not recognize her as Tamar because of the veil she wore over her face. Thinking she was a prostitute, he requested her services. Tamar's plan was to become pregnant by this ruse in order to bear a child in Judah's line, because Judah had not given her to his son Shelah. So she played the part of a prostitute and struck a deal with Judah for a goat with a security deposit of his staff, seal, and cord. When Judah was able to have a goat sent to Enaim, in order to collect his staff and seal, the woman was nowhere to be found and no one knew of any prostitute in Enaim. (Genesis 38:12–23)

Three months later, Tamar was accused of prostitution on account of her pregnancy. Upon hearing this news, Judah ordered that she be burned to death. Tamar sent the staff, seal, and cord to Judah with a message declaring that the owner of these items was the man who had made her pregnant. Upon recognizing his security deposit, Judah released Tamar from her sentence. Tamar's place in the family and Judah's posterity secured, she gives birth to twins, Perez and Zerah. Their birth is reminiscent of the birth of Rebekah's twin sons. The midwife marks Zerah's hand with a scarlet cord when it emerges from the womb first, but Perez is born first.[4] Perez is identified in the Book of Ruth as the ancestor of King David. (Ruth 4:18–22) The Genesis narrative also makes a note that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar. (Genesis 38:24–30)

 

Matthew 1King James Version (KJV)

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

What should we learn from ksazma post concerning Judah Tamar? Here is my cut and paste take for you below, I wonder what ksazma think he has accomplish by his post above?         

There are two women named Tamar mentioned in Scripture. Both are tragic figures, women who were ruined by the neglect and abuse of close family members. Their stories seem to be included in Scripture for the purpose of providing historical and spiritual information about the Messianic line.

Jacob’s son Judah, patriarch of the line of Judah had three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. A woman named Tamar married Er, but then Er died, leaving her a widow. Since it was required that the next of kin care for a brother’s widow, Tamar was given to Onan, but he also died. Shelah was still a boy and could not marry Tamar, so Judah asked her to return to her father’s house and wait until Shelah was grown up. However, once Shelah was old enough, Judah did not honor his promise. Tamar remained an unmarried widow. Tamar then went into town disguised as a prostitute, tricked Judah, and got him to sleep with her. She then became pregnant by Judah and bore twin sons named Perez and Zerah. -Genesis 38-.

The other Tamar was King David’s daughter. She had a brother, Absalom, and a half-brother, Amnon. Amnon had an obsessive desire for his half-sister Tamar, and one day he pretended to be sick and called for her to come to him in his bedroom to help him. When she was there alone with him, he raped her. Unfortunately, though David was angry, he did not punish Amnon or require him to marry Tamar, so Absalom took it upon himself to murder Amnon in revenge (2 Samuel 13:1–22). Absalom’s anger and bitterness toward his father because of these events eventually led to his attempt to usurp his throne and to disgrace David by committing public immorality with his father’s concubines.

We would expect the twin sons of Judah’s incestuous union with his daughter-in-law to be outcasts, hidden away, or perhaps not even mentioned in the Bible. However, surprisingly, the Messianic line continues through Tamar’s son Perez. God did not provide a “cleaner” way to continue the line that would eventually include His Son. Perez was the ancestor of Jesus of Nazereth.

It is the same with King David’s story. Absalom’s anger and rejection of his father’s rule seem to have been born out of a festering bitterness toward David. Though Absalom was clearly in the wrong for the murder of Amnon, we sympathize with him, and we sympathize with his disgraced sister. Considering David’s own immorality and the murder he committed, it is easy to see why Absalom thought himself the better man. But, despite David’s faults, God still chose to continue the line of the Messiah through David rather than through Absalom.

Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

Keith posted:

ksazam base on my observation during the course of our discussions by far the majority of your statements are either based on ignorance, or are made against better knowledge or at best depend on information selected in a very biased way. I want to credit Andrew for providing the following information, I was reminded that I didn't address the statement concerning the many version of the Bible.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the book "The Light" by al-Haj Sultan Hafiz Abdul (revised by Maulana Syed Zia-ud-Din Ahmad Gilani) we are told that the synoptic writers (i.e. the three recorders of the Gospel that are more historically orientated and as such are rather similar in comparison to the fourth recorder, John, who looks at the events from a more elevated position) of the Gospel are Paul, Luke, Matthew and John. Actually there are only three; John's part of the Gospel is the exception; and Paul did not write an account of the Gospel at all! The "synoptic", as every Christian of even rudimentary learning knows, are: Matthew, Mark and Luke.

Christians rightfully look at "learned men" like this with suspicion, for they cannot make an acceptable contribution. We find it, however, extremely tragic that millions of Muslims get their sole information about the Bible from such uninformed or dishonest men, who build their arguments entirely on one-sided, sifted and selected knowledge, or who argue against better knowledge.

We must, however, hasten to add that by no means all Muslims argue in this rather base spirit. We shall confine our analysis primarily to one book, which is typical in its anti-Christian stance, is relevant to our situation, and is reasonably comprehensive.

We are told, however, that

"What used to be the word of God, has been so adulterated by human hands, that the word of God is hardly distinguishable from the word of man. In some places we do still find a glimmer of the truth that Jesus taught - the gems of divine wisdom that he uttered for the good of his people - but these are few and far between in the jungles of interpolations and contradictions with which the Bible is dense ... Christianity, as we all know, is founded on BLIND BELIEF, where rational thinking plays no part whatever ... It is admitted by the most learned men in the Hebrew language, that the present English version of the Old Testament contains at least 100,000 errors (this would amount to approximately three errors in every verse. G.N.) ... It is not known for certain who in fact wrote any of the books of the Old Testament ... Christians themselves are in disagreement as to what books are inspired."

It is alleged that practically all versions of the Bible have differed from one another and no-one knows yet which is right.

Again and again Christians are asked why there are so many versions. Muslims are surprised to hear that these versions are nothing other than different translations of the same original documents. The 'Authorized' or 'King James Version' dates back to the year A.D. 1611. With the changing of a living language a revision became necessary. In addition to that, many more manuscripts had since been found. Some verses were contained in some of these manuscripts, but not in others (see pp. 17ff.). These texts appear in italics in the 'Revised Versions'. To grasp the extent of these passages in relation to the whole text it ought to be said that besides two portions of 12 verses each (Nos. 5. and 6. on pp. 19-20) and two verses which are omitted for being repetitions (Mark 9:44 and 46 are repeated by vs.48), eight sentences or portions thereof (4) without any bearing on the message or meaning of the text are in question. This makes out 0.1% of the 7959 verses of the New Testament!

Some translations are aimed at great accuracy for the scholar; others are in a popular style avoiding less common words or phrases, catering for the young or less educated reader who is interested in the biblical story and its teaching rather than in theological concepts. The message and content of all is much more identical than the different translations of the Qur'an (i.e. Yusuf Ali, Dawood, Marmaduke Pickthall, George Sale, Rodwell, Arberry etc.).

"Although an extravagant claim is put forward by Bible Societies and other fanatics, that the Bible is the most read book in the world, the contrary is true."

The intimate knowledge claimed by Muslims concerning these things perplexes us. We note, however, that there is little or no substantiation for these claims. The "best known" Bible scholars and commentators referred to are men who are totally obscure personalities.

The fact that Islam has never tolerated textual criticism of the Qur'an, makes it easy for Muslims to assume that all theologians that practice the "higher (or formal) criticism", (not to be confused with textual criticism!) must surely give a true reflection of the Bible. That this is not so, is common knowledge, for "higher criticism" is based on philosophical speculations and makes for arbitrary statements, very often with no Biblical foundation. Speculative theology in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries has created vast numbers of claims and speculations, which were neither Biblical nor ever substantiated and were never taken seriously by Christians. To draw material from such theology puts the Bible in a totally false light.

Muslims, however, have concluded that:

"The Bible was once upon a time the word of God"

and that:

"the present Bible can never by any stretch of imagination be called the inspired word of God"

and that:

"faith demands total allegiance to the Bible with its faults, absurdities, everything. Reason, on the other hand, is loath to accept matters that constitute an insult to the human intelligence."

Muslims also ask, referring to the Authorized Version, Revised Version and others,

"What need has the Word of God to go through so many versions? Our reason says, that the true Word of God should have remained unaltered, uncorrupted, unrevised, exactly as it was revealed to Christ."

We have to stop for a moment to consider these allegations.

First of all, the Word of God was not revealed to Jesus. He IS the revelation of God and He IS the Word of God. That is even supported by the Qur'an (Surah 4:171 and 3:45,59).

Then we would have to ask the categorical question: WHEN, WHERE And by WHOM was the Bible changed? Even the Qur'an bears witness that the Torah and the Gospel were definitely in existence during Mohammed's time (pp. 5-6). It goes against the facts to claim that the Bible was changed thereafter.

The Qur'an claims to be sent to guard the former revelations (Surah 5:47-51) and states explicitly that the Torah and Gospel are revelation. That means they came from God and are consequently His Word. The Qur'an also states strongly that no one can change the Words of God (Surah 6:34 and 10:64).

The writings of the New Testament were composed in a certain context of history and time, more than 500 years earlier than the Qur'anic writings, and up to 1,500 years after those of the Old Testament. Unlike Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, Arabic has remained a spoken language greatly influenced by the Qur'an to the present time. Hebrew experienced an interruption as a living language for about 1,500 years, during the time of the Diaspora, and Aramaic is no longer a living language at all. Research work in this century particularly, has greatly expanded our knowledge of Hebrew and has helped solve the language difficulty. This, as well as the inevitable ageing of every language (just try to read a book written 200 years ago) has made it necessary to revise existing translations of the Bible periodically to make the text true to the living language again.

To a Christian the need to read or recite Scripture or prayers in their original (language) makes no sense. Basically we are interested in the content of the message and not in the mechanics of the original. We deem it highly unlikely that the average Christian will manage to gain a knowledge of the original language(s) of the Bible equal to that of the highly qualified teams of linguists that do our translations. Besides that, we firmly believe that God understands us in our language when we worship, praise Him or speak to Him in prayer.

We also cannot subscribe to the Muslim view that the inspired character of a prophetic utterance is suspect when one cannot precisely determine the author. Ultimately the prophet or writer of an inspired message is just a tool in God's hand. If we seek to establish the authenticity of a letter, we do not make this dependent on our knowledge of the make and locality of the pen as long as we are sure that the message is genuine.

The charge that there are 100,000 errors in the Old Testament is too absurd even to need an answer, and the statement, that the Christian faith is essentially blind belief, throws poor light on the information at the disposal of the writer.

Within the framework of a book like this, it is obviously impossible to deal with all claims made against the Bible. There are, however some that are more prominent than others and we shall have to consider these first."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Long story that ignores the facts. Correction, Andrew above is plain lying about the facts of the Bible. They are not translations. They are different versions. The Roman Catholic Bible is a different version with its 73 books than the Protestant Bibles with their 66 books. The Jehovahs have different version to the point that regular Christians don't see Jehovahs as Christians. Other regular Christians don't regard Catholics as Christians either. So Andrew can lie how much he wants and you can swallow it up how much you want but one has to be blinded in faith at accept Andrew's lies above.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:
seignet posted:
 

Abraham had many concubines and he had children with all of them. Whether he had children with them before and after Ishmael and Isaac were born is questionable. Nonetheless, he fathered many children.

However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded.

 

When people talk stupidness, they should be careful to cover all their tracks.

Below is the story of Judah, Tamar and their two illegitimate sons. One of those ILLIGITIMATE sons, Phares is recorded by Matthew as Jesus' forefather.

At what point was Hager ever referred to as a prostitute? Yet this God of the Bible inspired its writers to record Judah's two sons which he got after screwing his daughter in law on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute. What is with these Biblical characters? Rueben was screwing his step mother on the rooftop.

But that God who sees and knows everything and doesn't make mistakes couldn't find another forefather for his son Jesus.

Tamar and Judah

 
Judah and Tamar,

After Shelah had grown up, Judah became a widower. After Judah mourned the death of his wife, he planned on going to Timnah to shear his sheep. Upon hearing this news, Tamar disguised herself as a prostitute and immediately went to Enaim which was en route to Judah's destination. Upon arriving at Enaim, Judah saw the woman but did not recognize her as Tamar because of the veil she wore over her face. Thinking she was a prostitute, he requested her services. Tamar's plan was to become pregnant by this ruse in order to bear a child in Judah's line, because Judah had not given her to his son Shelah. So she played the part of a prostitute and struck a deal with Judah for a goat with a security deposit of his staff, seal, and cord. When Judah was able to have a goat sent to Enaim, in order to collect his staff and seal, the woman was nowhere to be found and no one knew of any prostitute in Enaim. (Genesis 38:12–23)

Three months later, Tamar was accused of prostitution on account of her pregnancy. Upon hearing this news, Judah ordered that she be burned to death. Tamar sent the staff, seal, and cord to Judah with a message declaring that the owner of these items was the man who had made her pregnant. Upon recognizing his security deposit, Judah released Tamar from her sentence. Tamar's place in the family and Judah's posterity secured, she gives birth to twins, Perez and Zerah. Their birth is reminiscent of the birth of Rebekah's twin sons. The midwife marks Zerah's hand with a scarlet cord when it emerges from the womb first, but Perez is born first.[4] Perez is identified in the Book of Ruth as the ancestor of King David. (Ruth 4:18–22) The Genesis narrative also makes a note that Judah did not have further sexual relations with Tamar. (Genesis 38:24–30)

 

Matthew 1King James Version (KJV)

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

What should we learn from ksazma post concerning Judah Tamar? Here is my cut and paste take for you below, I wonder what ksazma think he has accomplish by his post above?         

There are two women named Tamar mentioned in Scripture. Both are tragic figures, women who were ruined by the neglect and abuse of close family members. Their stories seem to be included in Scripture for the purpose of providing historical and spiritual information about the Messianic line.

Jacob’s son Judah, patriarch of the line of Judah had three sons: Er, Onan, and Shelah. A woman named Tamar married Er, but then Er died, leaving her a widow. Since it was required that the next of kin care for a brother’s widow, Tamar was given to Onan, but he also died. Shelah was still a boy and could not marry Tamar, so Judah asked her to return to her father’s house and wait until Shelah was grown up. However, once Shelah was old enough, Judah did not honor his promise. Tamar remained an unmarried widow. Tamar then went into town disguised as a prostitute, tricked Judah, and got him to sleep with her. She then became pregnant by Judah and bore twin sons named Perez and Zerah. -Genesis 38-.

The other Tamar was King David’s daughter. She had a brother, Absalom, and a half-brother, Amnon. Amnon had an obsessive desire for his half-sister Tamar, and one day he pretended to be sick and called for her to come to him in his bedroom to help him. When she was there alone with him, he raped her. Unfortunately, though David was angry, he did not punish Amnon or require him to marry Tamar, so Absalom took it upon himself to murder Amnon in revenge (2 Samuel 13:1–22). Absalom’s anger and bitterness toward his father because of these events eventually led to his attempt to usurp his throne and to disgrace David by committing public immorality with his father’s concubines.

We would expect the twin sons of Judah’s incestuous union with his daughter-in-law to be outcasts, hidden away, or perhaps not even mentioned in the Bible. However, surprisingly, the Messianic line continues through Tamar’s son Perez. God did not provide a “cleaner” way to continue the line that would eventually include His Son. Perez was the ancestor of Jesus of Nazereth.

It is the same with King David’s story. Absalom’s anger and rejection of his father’s rule seem to have been born out of a festering bitterness toward David. Though Absalom was clearly in the wrong for the murder of Amnon, we sympathize with him, and we sympathize with his disgraced sister. Considering David’s own immorality and the murder he committed, it is easy to see why Absalom thought himself the better man. But, despite David’s faults, God still chose to continue the line of the Messiah through David rather than through Absalom.

Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

Now, what does any of what you wrote above have to do with my response to the following "However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"?

You have a knack for missing the point.

To recap. Saggabai stated that

"However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"

This is quite interesting in light of the fact that Judah's two illegitimate sons are recorded and one is even one of Jesus' forefathers. Now these two illegitimate son came about because their father Judah screwed his daughter in law, Tamar on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute.

Then we have Jacob's son, Rueben who screwed his step mother on the rooftop. He too was recorded.

If these are the kinds of people who gets recorded in the Bible, one would be so much better off not being recorded there.

Even the two whoring sisters are recorded. Even Samson is recorded. Samson who went to Gaza, saw a whore and went into her. These dudes have a habit of seeing a woman and just going into them. I at least buy ladies a drink first before I go into them.

Keith posted:

 Like I said before I was not aware Jesus was lost.

That story about being in the wilderness 40 days and 40 nights, remember?

Next we will hear John the Baptist was lost too.

Not all of him, just his head, it was said, remember?

cain posted:
antabanta posted

So the god Zeus is real? How does he compare to the Christian God?

Yes he is, so is Thor his son, I got some Marvel books on him.

Cain, Thor was my favorite Marvel hero. Makes sense that this new flame throwing Thor is going to pitch for the New York Mets on opening day. I believe they are grossly underpaying him though.

Image result for noah syndergaard contract

ksazma posted:

To recap. Saggabai stated that

"However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"

This is quite interesting in light of the fact that Judah's two illegitimate sons are recorded and one is even one of Jesus' forefathers. Now these two illegitimate son came about because their father Judah screwed his daughter in law, Tamar on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute.

Then we have Jacob's son, Rueben who screwed his step mother on the rooftop. He too was recorded.

If these are the kinds of people who gets recorded in the Bible, one would be so much better off not being recorded there.

Speaking about knack of missing the point, what more could be expected of you the lack of reading and understanding.

"Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

cain posted:
Keith posted:

 Like I said before I was not aware Jesus was lost.

That story about being in the wilderness 40 days and 40 nights, remember?

Next we will hear John the Baptist was lost too.

Not all of him, just his head, it was said, remember?

During those 40 days and nights even Satan tempted Jesus. Heard of Satan tempting people but don't know how Satan would tempt God.

The Bible teaches that the devil is the enemy of God. I don't accept that concept as the devil would be in no position to be the enemy of God if God is on this way much higher platform. It is more reasonable to think that the devil could only be the enemy of man since they would be on the same level/platform. I don't know why people insist that man sin against God either. Religiously speaking, man's actions whether good or bad does not alter the stature or standing of God. Here again, it is more reasonable to think that if human beings sin, they are doing so against their own souls. Here is what I think is another misconception. The notion that God is a jealous God. How does a supreme being become jealous when there is not an equal to him? God would be quite confused to be jealous of others when he is supposedly so much more supreme to them. If my wife was drooling over a stud on tv, that wouldn't bother me. Now if that stud was down the street, I might be affected because I may begin to worry where else is he down. Now if I can be that reasonable, why can't this wise and magnificent God?

Two potentially interesting shows on CNN tonight, Finding Jesus and Believer. I intend to watch them. It may be time well spent.

Keith posted:
ksazma posted:

To recap. Saggabai stated that

"However, in that ancient culture only legitimate sons are recorded"

This is quite interesting in light of the fact that Judah's two illegitimate sons are recorded and one is even one of Jesus' forefathers. Now these two illegitimate son came about because their father Judah screwed his daughter in law, Tamar on the roadside who he thought was a prostitute.

Then we have Jacob's son, Rueben who screwed his step mother on the rooftop. He too was recorded.

If these are the kinds of people who gets recorded in the Bible, one would be so much better off not being recorded there.

Speaking about knack of missing the point, what more could be expected of you the lack of reading and understanding.

"Why are these unpleasant stories included in Scripture, and why are the people involved people who hurt others, even their own family members granted the privilege of being included in the Messianic line? It may be simply to show us that God’s purpose is accomplished despite man’s unrighteousness. In Hebrews 11 there is a long list of Old Testament people who are commended for their faith, and among them are many sinful people who did dreadful things. But, because they believed God, their faith was credited to them as righteousness (Genesis 15:6)."

The passage stated; "Samson went to Gaza, saw a whore and went into her". (full stop). Nothing else said about that incident there. It was not followed up by God reprimanding Samson for going into a whore just because he saw her. (Maybe she was a Palestinian whore and we saw the many incidents in the Bible where God seems to hate the Palestinians so God may be well pleased with him screwing her. We remember the story of the Moabites where God commanded Moses and Aaron to kill everyone else, man, woman and children. Except the virgins who were of sex having age. And they even gave God 16 thousands of these virgins. This God was quite bigoted). God did not give him the talk about morality. God did not warn him about STDs. God did not even tell him that he can end up with HIV/AIDS. None of the sorts. Since God inspired the writers to write these passages, what message did God conveyed by "Samson went to Gaza, saw a whore and went into her". (full stop).

Like Anil,s Uncle...Sampson was a knock man.

Kaz I am impressed u actually read the Bible;. In the past as a little lad the Bible was used to lift me up....when I went for a hair cut the barber would have me sit on one to get more height.

cain posted:

Like Anil,s Uncle...Sampson was a knock man.

Kaz I am impressed u actually read the Bible;. In the past as a little lad the Bible was used to lift me up....when I went for a hair cut the barber would have me sit on one to get more height.

You sat on a bible and yet you wutliss? Bai, god can't even help you.

Add Reply

Likes (1)
Keith
×
×
×
×
×