Who is the father of Jesus, if he is not the son of God or Joseph ?

[jude3]

Well, for a start, we have the balance if the scriptures written after Jesus. We have revelations about the peculiar nature of the church (the bride of Christ), which was previously not revealed...a mystery, but now revealed. We have reaching about the end times; about church governance; about roles if leaders, elders etc. The holy spirit also clearly aided the disciples, just as Jesus said, eg they wiould have the right words to preach and defend themselves. (just compare how unlearned peter spoke before and after Pentecost...! A miracle just there.)

I could go on.

But the hs also lives on today in my heart, guiding me, teaching me etc

Yes, I believe in the Big Bang and do believe that the universe and physical laws within it are one of God's greatest miracles. Indeed, it is summed up in the attribute 'Rahman'.

So, the Holy Spirit takes different forms - and one of the forms would only come after Jesus had left. A new form would the 'spirit of truth' or 'comforter'.

Ok, I'll bite. Let's follow this logic (I'll read your links later, and if the info is in them - just cut and paste it here).

Can you show me what new revelations the 'spirit of truth' brought - that 'he heard' and conveyed to humanity. Jesus says 'he' will bring new revelations and guide us to the truth. Can I have some examples of this new guidance. After all, Jesus says 'he' will tell us things that were unknown before - i.e. revelations, and will guide us to the truth.

To me that sounds exactly like what Muhammad, pbuh, did.

Cheers,
Shafique

[jude3]

Why do you believe god created the universe (a miracle if the highest order) and you don't believe in any other miracles that have been recorded in the Torah?

How did Mohammed get to heaven?

Yes, I believe in the Big Bang and do believe that the universe and physical laws within it are one of God's greatest miracles. Indeed, it is summed up in the attribute 'Rahman'.

So, the Holy Spirit takes different forms - and one of the forms would only come after Jesus had left. A new form would the 'spirit of truth' or 'comforter'.

Ok, I'll bite. Let's follow this logic (I'll read your links later, and if the info is in them - just cut and paste it here).

Can you show me what new revelations the 'spirit of truth' brought - that 'he heard' and conveyed to humanity. Jesus says 'he' will bring new revelations and guide us to the truth. Can I have some examples of this new guidance. After all, Jesus says 'he' will tell us things that were unknown before - i.e. revelations, and will guide us to the truth.

To me that sounds exactly like what Muhammad, pbuh, did.

Cheers,
Shafique

[Shafique]

Jude, thanks for the examples of the new revelations.

Well, for a start, we have the balance if the scriptures written after Jesus.

Are the Gnostic gospels included in this?

How about the Roman Catholic writings which elevate Mary to a deity. Do Roman Catholics believe that this is a truth from the 'comforter'? If so, why do you disagree with them?

Given that the Orthodox Eastern Church is different from the Latin Church - did each get different revelations on the nature of the Church?

We have reaching about the end times; about church governance; about roles if leaders, elders etc. The holy spirit also clearly aided the disciples, just as Jesus said, eg they wiould have the right words to preach and defend themselves. (just compare how unlearned peter spoke before and after Pentecost...! A miracle just there.)

But isn't this description of the Holy Spirit exactly the same nature of the Holy Spirit that was around when Jesus was in Palestine?

Anyway - I see that you believe in a number of revelations after Jesus had left. From our perspective you should have continued that logic and kept your heart open for when the Comforter's message was conveyed to you in this day and age. Rather than believing the 'he' is metaphorical, we believe it is literal. That is a choice - and therefore we just appear to differ on the choice of which verses to take literally.

To you your choice, to me mine.

Cheers,
Shafique

[Shafique]

Why do you believe god created the universe (a miracle if the highest order) and you don't believe in any other miracles that have been recorded in the Torah?

How did Mohammed get to heaven?

I believe that there is an outside force which created the universe, as that is the most logical scientific explanation- to believe we are here by chance alone requires more faith than I can muster. A belief in a creator is therefore logical to me.

The descriptions of Muhammad's , pbuh, journey to heaven end with the phrase 'then he woke up'. The journey was a spiritual one. I do not believe we can get into a space craft and travel to heaven, as heaven is not within our temporal dimensions.

Cheers,
Shafique

[Ameera]

I think the title of this thread is highly offensive indeed disgusting. All Prophets are sinless and pure using derogatory terms in conjunction with them it not the Muslim way!

All posts on this thread that seriously address this highly disrespectful statement are in turn condoning the disrespect, calling you all idiots and worse would perhaps upset you but placing such filth alongside a Prophets name does not offend you! Shame on you you lost lost creatures, may Allah give you hadiat.

[StopS]

I think the title of this thread is highly offensive indeed disgusting. All Prophets are sinless and pure using derogatory terms in conjunction with them it not the Muslim way!

All posts on this thread that seriously address this highly disrespectful statement are in turn condoning the disrespect, calling you all idiots and worse would perhaps upset you but placing such filth alongside a Prophets name does not offend you! Shame on you you lost lost creatures, may Allah give you hadiat.

Is this all you can contribute? These are adults discussing a topic in a knowledgeable, respectful and peaceful manner. They don't scream at each other or use insults.
Why don't you think about the facts and their consequences they bring up before calling other humans bad names?

[jude3]

I receibed a warning from the moderator, Shadiq, because I said the Koran was Satanic.

If I change it to say, "the Koran has its roots in pagan Iraq...which come from Satanic pagan gods"...is that OK...?

Can I ask...do you also warn Muslims who call Jesus "meat on a stick" and other such offensive titles?

I note that for many Muslims, how easily they are offended....for example, there is a movement in the European Court (by Muslims) to disallow anyone speaking against their religion...it's some sort of declaration they are having introduced into the parliament. Why are they so afarid of scrutiny of the religion?

You see, the real issue is that Jesus had the greatest cause to be offended...he was one spat upon and abused....luaghed and jeered at...hanging naked infront of his tormenters. But what was his reaction? Take out an order to make people stop offending him? Hardly. He prayed to his heavenly father, "Please forgive them...for they don't understand what they're doing"

That is the real message of what it is to be a ofllower of Jesus.

Islam has a great deal to learn.

Shafique, do you get a warning also because you said the Jews would find the NT Satanic? Or, are these types of (impartial?) warnings only issued to non-Muslims?

[jude3]

Are the Gnostic gospels included in this?

How about the Roman Catholic writings which elevate Mary to a deity. Do Roman Catholics believe that this is a truth from the 'comforter'? If so, why do you disagree with them?

Given that the Orthodox Eastern Church is different from the Latin Church - did each get different revelations on the nature of the Church?

No. Catholicism adds to the scriptures - eg the supremacy of Mary, the infallibility of the Pope, and many other apostate teachings. They may well believe they received this revelation from 'the comforter'...but everything has to be anchored back to scripture...that is the benchmark for God's truth.

Same with different styles of church...eg Eastern/Latin. I cannot comment further.

[jude3]

Anyway - I see that you believe in a number of revelations after Jesus had left. From our perspective you should have continued that logic and kept your heart open for when the Comforter's message was conveyed to you in this day and age. Rather than believing the 'he' is metaphorical, we believe it is literal. That is a choice - and therefore we just appear to differ on the choice of which verses to take literally.

To you your choice, to me mine.

Not so. This is not about choice...it's about the text on the page and accepting/not accepting it. You would agree that we come to God in faith (for all that means)...and yet, here, you say you do not/cannot accept what the text says.

The real rub comes from you not accepting the context of what's going on. Here, the disciples are saddened that Jesus is about to leave. So, what does Jesus do? He provides a clear and powerful message that when he goes...another will come and comfort THEM. Then, we see how their lives were wonderfully lived out in the spirit and power of God through their witness and testimony. We have the very events recorded for us, eg Pentecost.

But no...this is not good enough for you. Despite the 20-30 verses that attribute the Holy Spirit/Comforter to being powerful, to be a raiser of the dead, to live in people's lives...despite all of that, you cling on to a 'truth' that says pduh must be that promised comforter.

So, in effect, Jesus is comforting his dsicisples about his pending departure.....but, that's OK, because pduh comes along 500 years later.

Excuse me for giving up now on this discussion - but you are being foolish. Logic and text prove you wrong.

Kind regards.

[jude3]

I believe that there is an outside force which created the universe, as that is the most logical scientific explanation- to believe we are here by chance alone requires more faith than I can muster. A belief in a creator is therefore logical to me.

The descriptions of Muhammad's , pbuh, journey to heaven end with the phrase 'then he woke up'. The journey was a spiritual one. I do not believe we can get into a space craft and travel to heaven, as heaven is not within our temporal dimensions.

So, where is Mohammad burried?

Also, as I've asked 3-4 times now - how do explain the difference between Jesus calming the water and waves, vs him walking (or not walking) on the water?

Also, how did Enoch die?

Also, how did Elijah get to heaven?

Just try and answer the q's simple and shortly. Please don't deflect.

[Shafique]

Muhammad, pbuh, is buried in Medina. (Google would have helped you here)

The Jews say Elijah has to return bodily from heaven before the Jewish Messiah can come. Jesus clarified that they are wrong to believe this literally, and that Elijah came back in the form of John the Baptist.

Therefore, unless someone can prove otherwise, Elijah and Enoch and all other humans so far created have all lived and died on earth. Some have died in the atmosphere of earth - but that is still 'Earth'.

Cheers,
Shafique

[jude3]

Muhammad, pbuh, is buried in Medina. (Google would have helped you here)

The Jews say Elijah has to return bodily from heaven before the Jewish Messiah can come. Jesus clarified that they are wrong to believe this literally, and that Elijah came back in the form of John the Baptist.

Therefore, unless someone can prove otherwise, Elijah and Enoch and all other humans so far created have all lived and died on earth. Some have died in the atmosphere of earth - but that is still 'Earth'.

Cheers,
Shafique

I'll not comment on Elijah/John the Baptist as that is a complex discussion reserved for others.

But, back to basics -

What do you accept happened to Elijah?

What do you accept happened to Enoch?

Just simple answers please...no essays/theology.

Oh, and don't forget this one.

How do explain the difference between Jesus calming the water and waves, vs him walking (or not walking) on the water?

[Shafique]

I covered Elijah and Enoch, and all other humans created, in my previous post. All lived and died on earth.

Jesus calming the waters can be explained by God using natural forces of wind and water currents to change to calm the water. Jesus walking on water would require God to either make Jesus lighter than water or the water solid. I haven't heard of the lakes in Palestine freezing, or know of a way a human being can be made lighter than water so he can walk.

Given that the Bible contains other questionable accounts - I choose to not believe this happened. I still consider Jesus to be the Messiah of the Jews and a 'son of Man' and a 'son of God' - and that he did perform other miracles.

But let me now come to another point you raised which I didn't cover - concerning additions to the scripture and picking and choosing from Christian views:

No. Catholicism adds to the scriptures - eg the supremacy of Mary, the infallibility of the Pope, and many other apostate teachings. They may well believe they received this revelation from 'the comforter'...but everything has to be anchored back to scripture...that is the benchmark for God's truth.

Same with different styles of church...eg Eastern/Latin.

You appear to be saying that the Othordox Church and Roman Catholic beliefs MAY be based on revelation from the Comforter.

So, the outsider considering conversion to Christianity has to work out which version of Christianity to believe in. Tony Blair was convinced Roman Catholicism is true and converted - for example. He's a lawyer by training, IIRC.

That's not surprising - Jesus said that the comforter would come and lead people to the truth - and you consider that this is referring to the Holy Spirit.

What is surprising is that you disagree with me when I say I am choosing which parts of the Bible to take literally, just like you are doing. You counter

Not so. This is not about choice...it's about the text on the page and accepting/not accepting it.

I am choosing to accept the prophecy by Jesus that a person 'he' will come as the 'spirit of truth' and guide people to the truth. You tell me that I should ignore the literal words of Jesus and accept your interpretation that the 'he' is not a man but the Holy Spirit.

Why is your choice correct? Is Hubris part of Christian theology?

Cheers,
Shafique

[jude3]

Jesus calming the waters can be explained by God using natural forces of wind and water currents to change to calm the water. Jesus walking on water would require God to either make Jesus lighter than water or the water solid. I haven't heard of the lakes in Palestine freezing, or know of a way a human being can be made lighter than water so he can walk.

The problem is, you are choosing to accept only parts of the text. The text says Jesus rebuked the storm and IMMEDIATELY everything became still. Then, the disciples were afraid...and questioned how could Jesus do this. Your lack of faith is revealed...as you are blinded by this notion that no miracles exist...and certainly that no miracles can be attributed to Jesus, the Christ. I can understand why you do this...just sad about it.

Given that the Bible contains other questionable accounts - I choose to not believe this happened. I still consider Jesus to be the Messiah of the Jews and a 'son of Man' and a 'son of God' - and that he did perform other miracles.

Can you please list another miracle Jesus did that cannot be explained by normal science?

I am choosing to accept the prophecy by Jesus that a person 'he' will come as the 'spirit of truth' and guide people to the truth. You tell me that I should ignore the literal words of Jesus and accept your interpretation that the 'he' is not a man but the Holy Spirit.

Why is your choice correct? Is Hubris part of Christian theology?

I've well answered this issue of He...because THAT"S WHAT THE TEXT SAYS...and importantly, the context shows that Jesus was giving them good news that their sadness was only temporary...and then the text goes on to actually show how/when He (the holy spirit) came upon the disciples collectively in a special/new/powerful way.

You are choosing to ignore all of these points.

On Tony Blaire and co...people know when they are truly called by Jesus to follow him. The Holy Spirit guides.

[Shafique]

The problem is, you are choosing to accept only parts of the text..

Nope - can't see it myself. If Jesus wasn't there and the sea suddenly became calm - no one would have called it a miracle, but a strange occurence in nature. Science and observation can explain away choppy waters suddenly becoming calm. It was a miracle that Jesus there and commanded it to happen - but God didn't violate any natural laws by making the seas become calm.

In regards to Tony Blair - I'm not clear what you are saying? If he says the conversion to RC was because the Holy Spirit was guiding him, would you dispute this?

With respect - I repeat, you are asking me to agree with your interpretation of the Bible and NOT take Jesus literally when he says the Spirit of Truth will be a 'he'. You are asking me to follow your choice.

I am choosing to take Jesus at his word. You believe I'm wrong to to do this. I believe I'm right. Perhaps the 'spirit of truth' and 'Holy Spirit' has guided you here so that you are exposed to the truth? Can you be sure 'he' hasn't?

Cheers,
Shafique