Total Posts:167|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What are your thoughts on Jesus' death?

Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 2:05:34 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.
The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH!

Stories about it in the bible Story book are just that, human devised Stories!

e.g. - 'The Jesus of the Gospels is an artificial creation, a collective work of art who evolved through the combined consciousness of two generations of Christian worship.'

" A. N. Wilson (Paul, p144)

'Whether Jesus ever actually existed has long been debated. The argument (very well documented) is that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence of his existence in documents other than highly suspect Christian sources.'

" Riane Eisler (The Chalice & the Blade, p122)

(Source: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com...)

You are welcome to try proving otherwise?

As far as you pushing YOUR Rules/Code of Conduct, remember that YOU are a malignant Sinner!

So FIRST try taking the BEAMS out of your own eyes, before you hypocritically cast stones at others! (Matt. 7:1 - 5) bible Story book
Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 2:29:21 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:05:34 AM, Composer wrote:

The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH!

Stories about it in the bible Story book are just that, human devised Stories!
While I was not particularly looking to discuss the historical authenticity of Jesus, I will entertain the idea.

e.g. - 'The Jesus of the Gospels is an artificial creation, a collective work of art who evolved through the combined consciousness of two generations of Christian worship.'

" A. N. Wilson (Paul, p144)


'Whether Jesus ever actually existed has long been debated. The argument (very well documented) is that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence of his existence in documents other than highly suspect Christian sources.'

" Riane Eisler (The Chalice & the Blade, p122)

(Source: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com...)

You are welcome to try proving otherwise?
To prove what? You provided one fringe scholar who objected to the consensus that Jesus existed. The first one you named is not even a scholar. Bart Ehrman (not a Christian) is a New Testament scholar and Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He wrote the following in regard to Jesus:
"He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees."

Michael Grant, a well known classicist, wrote this:
"In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary."

Richard Burridge, who is the dean of King's College London and Professor of Biblical Interpretation, wrote this on the subject:
"There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church's imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that anymore."

The book entitled Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography states that "he [Jesus] was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus [...] agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact." (p. 145)

Feel free to read about Jesus' existence here:
https://en.wikipedia.org...

As far as you pushing YOUR Rules/Code of Conduct, remember that YOU are a malignant Sinner!

So FIRST try taking the BEAMS out of your own eyes, before you hypocritically cast stones at others! (Matt. 7:1 - 5) bible Story book
I recommend examining some commentaries. If you believe Christians cannot correct the mistakes of others or remind people of rules, then it is a clear expression that you lack a sound understanding of the passage you cited.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 4:29:11 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:05:34 AM, Composer wrote:

The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH!

Stories about it in the bible Story book are just that, human devised Stories!
While I was not particularly looking to discuss the historical authenticity of Jesus, I will entertain the idea.

e.g. - 'The Jesus of the Gospels is an artificial creation, a collective work of art who evolved through the combined consciousness of two generations of Christian worship.'

" A. N. Wilson (Paul, p144)


'Whether Jesus ever actually existed has long been debated. The argument (very well documented) is that there is absolutely no corroborating evidence of his existence in documents other than highly suspect Christian sources.'

" Riane Eisler (The Chalice & the Blade, p122)

(Source: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com...)

You are welcome to try proving otherwise?

At 4/3/2016 2:29:21 AM, Elihu wrote:
To prove what? You provided one fringe scholar who objected to the consensus that Jesus existed. The first one you named is not even a scholar. Bart Ehrman (not a Christian) is a New Testament scholar and Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He wrote the following in regard to Jesus:
"He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees."
NOT ACCURATE YOU CHERRY-PICKER!

HOWEVER " when viewing the literature/story of Jesus Christ as written in the gospels, complete with supernatural events and claims, the Bible overlaps with previous literary traditions to such a degree that it is impossible for any of those claims/stories to have begun with a historical Jesus Christ. So what Bart is saying (and what, if pushed to "follow the evidence" as he himself mandates, he would have to agree to) is that there was a historical figure of Jesus but all of the fantastical elements of the story that are prefigured by earlier literary traditions did not originate with him. So the "historical Jesus" of Ehrman and New Testament scholars was not born of a virgin, did not say most of the things ascribed to him (at least not all the stuff that is so familiar to Philo, Stoicism, the Essenes or the Pharisees), was not the "Logos/Son of God", and did not resurrect. . . . .

For me, what is profoundly important is to show that the New Testament descriptions of Jesus Christ are literature based on compound mythology, resulting in the final claim (which is NOT revolutionary but rather was the decision of nearly a century of Bible scholars in the early days of historical criticism) that the Jesus of History is virtually unknowable and the Jesus of the gospels is mythology. (Source: http://www.holyblasphemy.net...)

At 4/3/2016 2:29:21 AM, Elihu wrote:
Michael Grant, a well known classicist, wrote this:
"In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary."

Richard Burridge, who is the dean of King's College London and Professor of Biblical Interpretation, wrote this on the subject:
"There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church's imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that anymore."

The book entitled Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography states that "he [Jesus] was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus [...] agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact." (p. 145)
Both Josephus & Tacitus base their conclusions upon 100% hearsay at best from those members claiming to be followers!

***: Jesus is an unknown historical figure. It is possible that he may have lived, since millions of people have lived without leaving a trace. It is not enough to declare 'We know nothing about Jesus, except that he existed'. On the contrary, we must boldly assert that 'We do not know anything about him, not even whether he existed'. In historical research, only the strictest accuracy permits us to say anything more. However, the very document which would positively prove the existence of Jesus is missing...Jesus belongs to history thanks to his name and the cult built around him, but he is not a historical figure. He is a divine being, whose knowledge was slowly developed by Christian minds. He was begotten in faith, in hope and in love. He was shaped by emotional fervor. He has been given changing figures by various forms of worship. He was born the moment he got his first believer... His only reality is spiritual. Everything else is phantasmagoria. -- "L'"nigme de J"sus", In Mercure de France, (March 1, 1923), pp. 377, and 398-399. (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...)

&

In the final analysis there is no evidence that the biblical character called "Jesus Christ" ever existed. As Nicholas Carter concludes in The Christ Myth: "No sculptures, no drawings, no markings in stone, nothing written in his own hand; and no letters, no commentaries, indeed no authentic documents written by his Jewish and Gentile contemporaries, Justice of Tiberius, Philo, Josephus, Seneca, Petronius Arbiter, Pliny the Elder, et al., to lend credence to his historicity." (Source: http://www.truthbeknown.com...)

&

ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources about Jesus derive from hearsay accounts. (Source: http://nobeliefs.com...)

At 4/3/2016 2:05:34 AM, Composer wrote:
As far as you pushing YOUR Rules/Code of Conduct, remember that YOU are a malignant Sinner!

So FIRST try taking the BEAMS out of your own eyes, before you hypocritically cast stones at others! (Matt. 7:1 - 5) bible Story book

At 4/3/2016 2:29:21 AM, Elihu wrote:
I recommend examining some commentaries.
Commentaries based upon 100% hearsay at best! (See e.g. *** above)

&

YOU can quote whomever you like, but what YOU CAN'T DO is provide proofs of a literal, miracle-working jebus!

I recommend you stop Sinning, but you freely choose to do otherwise apparently!

At 4/3/2016 2:29:21 AM, Elihu wrote:
If you believe Christians cannot correct the mistakes of others or remind people of rules, then it is a clear expression that you lack a sound understanding of the passage you cited.
You remain arrogant, hypocritical & in error! (Matt. 7:1-5)

1 John 3:6 exposes you as a false believer!

1 John 3:8 identifies you as a product of your Devil!

You pretend to be an angel of light, but when tested according to your own propaganda (e.g. 1 John 3:6 & 8) you are exposed as an arrogant hypocrite, fraud, jebus' reject & a confirmed agent of your Devil!
DanMGTOW
Posts: 1,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 6:41:04 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
i enjoy the story of jesus, because it is so absurd. an all knowing god came up with some rules, then your god had to sacrifice jesus in order to make a loop hole to get around the rules that your god created to begin with. to make it worse, the way to use this loop hole is to be gullible enough to believe things that was written in a book.
also, instead of creating jesus at the same time as adam and eve (so that everyone could be saved), your god decided to wait 4000+ years and then impregnate a woman who was about to be married.
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 9:33:51 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 6:41:04 AM, DanMGTOW wrote:
i enjoy the story of jesus, because it is so absurd. an all knowing god came up with some rules, then your god had to sacrifice jesus in order to make a loop hole to get around the rules that your god created to begin with. to make it worse, the way to use this loop hole is to be gullible enough to believe things that was written in a book.
also, instead of creating jesus at the same time as adam and eve (so that everyone could be saved), your god decided to wait 4000+ years and then impregnate a woman who was about to be married.
Indeed!

AND IF you are a trinitarian that believs jebus literally pre-existed in Story book heaven before being born a Gay pretend human, then it is in fact also a Mother Fu-ker!

That's the trinitarian facts!
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 9:38:11 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 6:41:04 AM, DanMGTOW wrote:
i enjoy the story of jesus, because it is so absurd. an all knowing god came up with some rules, then your god had to sacrifice jesus in order to make a loop hole to get around the rules that your god created to begin with. to make it worse, the way to use this loop hole is to be gullible enough to believe things that was written in a book.
also, instead of creating jesus at the same time as adam and eve (so that everyone could be saved), your god decided to wait 4000+ years and then impregnate a woman who was about to be married.

He made the universe , and everything In it .in a week. Then he decides he wants to start a religion. He wants people to worship Him.
So he ponders how can I get people to listen to me ?
He thinks long and hard as this is a challenge for good old god. Making a universe was easy as. But getting people to believe in me. It's close to impossible
Thousands of years past, then it dawns on him. Jesus will walk around telling people who I am I'll get people to believe in me via word of mouth. What a god
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 2:40:18 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.
There was no resurrection according to Islam.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
You are neglecting the Christian teaching of Jesus' second coming.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 2:51:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:40:18 PM, Elihu wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.
There was no resurrection according to Islam.

The Islamic position is clear about that. And presents the argument to show how illogical a resurrection would be considering nothing was achieved by it. Watch your own link.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
You are neglecting the Christian teaching of Jesus' second coming.
They are Christian teachings, but the resurrection itself achieved nothing. Now why would anyone expect anything more from a failed Messiah? His resurrection was the second coming if you can count. Jesus's first coming was his birth and ministry. His second coming was the resurrection. Now Christians are awaiting his third coming. The same poor math is how they arrived at the Trinity. (1 + 1 + 1 = 1 and also 3).
Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 2:59:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:51:37 PM, Harikrish wrote:

You are neglecting the Christian teaching of Jesus' second coming.
They are Christian teachings, but the resurrection itself achieved nothing. Now why would anyone expect anything more from a failed Messiah? His resurrection was the second coming if you can count. Jesus's first coming was his birth and ministry. His second coming was the resurrection. Now Christians are awaiting his third coming. The same poor math is how they arrived at the Trinity. (1 + 1 + 1 = 1 and also 3).
1 Corinthians 15:13-18 gives clear meaning to the resurrection:
If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.

He never left earth after his death, so I am not sure how you would consider his resurrection a second coming.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:28:31 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 2:59:48 PM, Elihu wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:51:37 PM, Harikrish wrote:

You are neglecting the Christian teaching of Jesus' second coming.
They are Christian teachings, but the resurrection itself achieved nothing. Now why would anyone expect anything more from a failed Messiah? His resurrection was the second coming if you can count. Jesus's first coming was his birth and ministry. His second coming was the resurrection. Now Christians are awaiting his third coming. The same poor math is how they arrived at the Trinity. (1 + 1 + 1 = 1 and also 3).
1 Corinthians 15:13-18 gives clear meaning to the resurrection:
If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.

He never left earth after his death, so I am not sure how you would consider his resurrection a second coming.

He departed from life at the crucifixion. He even he told the others who were condemned along with him he would see them in heaven before the day was over.

Luke 23:43 King James Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

But returned on the third day to fulfill his resurrection, thus making it his second coming. Now Christians are awaiting his third. The preterists believe he fulfilled his prophesies and we are living in the new order.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:44:03 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
You don't read very well.
You didn't think it was possible for me to speak like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO. And yet here you are complimenting me by saying :" Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO."
Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:44:55 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:28:31 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Luke 23:43 King James Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
I tend to disagree with this rendering of the text. I prefer the text rendered by Joseph Rotherham, which reads:
"Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:52:00 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:44:03 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
You don't read very well.
You didn't think it was possible for me to speak like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO. And yet here you are complimenting me by saying :" Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO."

I didn't believe that sentiments like; "Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity". seemed like a true championing of the christian cause.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:55:32 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:44:55 PM, Elihu wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:28:31 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Luke 23:43 King James Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
I tend to disagree with this rendering of the text. I prefer the text rendered by Joseph Rotherham, which reads:
"Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."

Your arguments are without merit. Read the different Bible translations accepted and in use.

New International Version
Jesus answered him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise."

New Living Translation
And Jesus replied, "I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise."

English Standard Version
And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

Berean Study Bible
And Jesus said to him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

Berean Literal Bible
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

New American Standard Bible
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

King James Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
And He said to him, "I assure you: Today you will be with Me in paradise."

International Standard Version
Jesus told him, "I tell you with certainty, today you will be with me in Paradise."

NET Bible
And Jesus said to him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
But Yeshua said to him, "Amen, I say to you that today you shall be with me in Paradise."

GOD'S WORD" Translation
Jesus said to him, "I can guarantee this truth: Today you will be with me in paradise."

New American Standard 1977
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

Jubilee Bible 2000
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.

King James 2000 Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto you, Today shall you be with me in paradise.

American King James Version
And Jesus said to him, Truly I say to you, To day shall you be with me in paradise.

American Standard Version
And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And Jesus said to him: Amen I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradise.

Darby Bible Translation
And Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

English Revised Version
And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise.

Webster's Bible Translation
And Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, This day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Weymouth New Testament
"I tell you in solemn truth," replied Jesus, "that this very day you shall be with me in Paradise."

World English Bible
Jesus said to him, "Assuredly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

Young's Literal Translation
and Jesus said to him, 'Verily I say to thee, To-day with me thou shalt be in the paradise.'
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:58:22 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:52:00 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:44:03 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
You don't read very well.
You didn't think it was possible for me to speak like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO. And yet here you are complimenting me by saying :" Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO."

I didn't believe that sentiments like; "Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity". seemed like a true championing of the christian cause.

As their Christian Champion I am obliged to admonish Christians when they show ignorance and poor scholarship.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:59:36 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:58:22 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:52:00 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:44:03 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
You don't read very well.
You didn't think it was possible for me to speak like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO. And yet here you are complimenting me by saying :" Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO."

I didn't believe that sentiments like; "Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity". seemed like a true championing of the christian cause.

As their Christian Champion I am obliged to admonish Christians when they show ignorance and poor scholarship.

Obliged by whom?
Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 3:59:43 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:55:32 PM, Harikrish wrote:

I tend to disagree with this rendering of the text. I prefer the text rendered by Joseph Rotherham, which reads:
"Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."

Your arguments are without merit. Read the different Bible translations accepted and in use.
Look at the Greek manuscripts prior to the 9th century. None of them had punctuation. The verse is punctuated based on interpretation.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 4:41:01 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:59:36 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:58:22 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:52:00 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:44:03 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
You don't read very well.
You didn't think it was possible for me to speak like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO. And yet here you are complimenting me by saying :" Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO."

I didn't believe that sentiments like; "Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity". seemed like a true championing of the christian cause.

As their Christian Champion I am obliged to admonish Christians when they show ignorance and poor scholarship.

Obliged by whom?

You are still too stuck on stupid. Any defender of a faith is obliged to maintain the truth about the faith he chose to defend.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 4:45:47 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 3:59:43 PM, Elihu wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:55:32 PM, Harikrish wrote:

I tend to disagree with this rendering of the text. I prefer the text rendered by Joseph Rotherham, which reads:
"Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."

Your arguments are without merit. Read the different Bible translations accepted and in use.
Look at the Greek manuscripts prior to the 9th century. None of them had punctuation. The verse is punctuated based on interpretation.

And the majority of Bibles if not all interpreted it the same way. Your scriptural ignorance cannot be defended by a code of conduct. You will need something stronger like real scriptural knowledge.

New International Version
Jesus answered him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise."

New Living Translation
And Jesus replied, "I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise."

English Standard Version
And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

Berean Study Bible
And Jesus said to him, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

Berean Literal Bible
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

New American Standard Bible
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

King James Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
And He said to him, "I assure you: Today you will be with Me in paradise."

International Standard Version
Jesus told him, "I tell you with certainty, today you will be with me in Paradise."

NET Bible
And Jesus said to him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
But Yeshua said to him, "Amen, I say to you that today you shall be with me in Paradise."

GOD'S WORD" Translation
Jesus said to him, "I can guarantee this truth: Today you will be with me in paradise."

New American Standard 1977
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

Jubilee Bible 2000
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.

King James 2000 Bible
And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto you, Today shall you be with me in paradise.

American King James Version
And Jesus said to him, Truly I say to you, To day shall you be with me in paradise.

American Standard Version
And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And Jesus said to him: Amen I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with me in paradise.

Darby Bible Translation
And Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

English Revised Version
And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise.

Webster's Bible Translation
And Jesus said to him, Verily I say to thee, This day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Weymouth New Testament
"I tell you in solemn truth," replied Jesus, "that this very day you shall be with me in Paradise."

World English Bible
Jesus said to him, "Assuredly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

Young's Literal Translation
and Jesus said to him, 'Verily I say to thee, To-day with me thou shalt be in the paradise.'
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 4:52:28 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 4:41:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:59:36 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:58:22 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:52:00 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:44:03 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:38:02 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:35:50 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 3:25:52 PM, desmac wrote:
At 4/3/2016 2:35:01 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 4/3/2016 12:17:18 AM, Elihu wrote:
I was watching a debate between Shabir Ally and David Wood. While the topic of the debate was in regard to whether or not Jesus was a prophet of Islam, and many interesting points were raised, Shabir Ally invoked a very provoking position. Unfortunately, David Wood did not respond to it as I hoped he would.

The exchange started with David Wood's comment that Allah is deceptive. He comes to this conclusion by stating that Allah would make "those who follow you [Jesus] superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection" (Surah Al Imran, verse 55). If that is the case, history clearly shows that the followers of Jesus who believed his resurrection were clearly superior. Therefore, they must be the true followers. Wood goes on to cite Surah An-Nisa, verses 157 and 158. They read:
And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise.

So we have Allah saying that the true followers of Jesus will be superior to those who disbelieve until the Day of Resurrection (that day, according to Muslims, has not happened). We also have Allah saying that people have been deceived in their belief that Jesus died. However, Shabir Ally pointed out the same thing Maulana Muhammad Ali pointed out in his own commentary:
1) Jesus remained on the cross for only a few hours (Mark 15:25; John 19:14), but death by crucifixion was time consuming.
2) The two men with men crucified with Jesus were still alive when taken down; the presumption is that Jesus was alive too.
3) The breaking of legs was resorted to in the case of the two criminals, but dispensed with in the case of Jesus (John 19:32, 33).
4) The side of Jesus being pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sigh of life.
5) Even Pilate did not believe that Jesus actually died in so short a time ( Mark 15:44).
Etc.

In other words, the Gospels (specifically Mark, the earliest) show hints that Jesus did not expire on the cross. Shabir Ally goes on to say that the Muslim position is not that Allah deceived the followers of Jesus, but rather it was the opponents of Jesus who were deceived. He also rightly pointed out that Jeremiah 20:7 tells us that God deceived. God deceived Jeremiah by using him to accomplish what the prophet himself thought he could not do. Shabir Ally adds that Allah did not deceive the people, but rather the "flow of events" at that time did. However, this is where it gets interesting. Shabir Ally points out that if Jesus was the Messiah, yet died on the cross, then is he not a failed Messiah? He did not sit on the throne. We, as Christians, say that he will do this upon his second return, yet the Jews at that time were not aware of his resurrection. To them, he was never resurrected, as it was done privately.

The debate can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com...

Before posting on this thread, consider the following:
Code of Conduct for debate.org:
http://www.debate.org...

My threads are for the purpose of debate.org members to discuss subjects of interest openly, honestly, and fairly without obvious personal attacks that are baseless, or even getting too negative about anyone or any one particular view.

My threads serve as a place for us to cultivate our belief and also to discuss how we can work together with others who believe similarly or even very differently from us.

Anyone who violates the Code of Conduct or my own personal "rules" on my threads will be reported and ignored.

Both sides in the debate showed how illogical and irrational the whole concept of the resurrection of Jesus was.

The Islamic view was the resurrection did not achieve the intended purpose. No Davidic kingdom was established, Jesus did not return to be seated on the throne of David as promised nor was the glory of the people of Israel restored.

Tbe Christian view was the resurrection brought about a spiritual context. The kingdom established was a spiritual kingdom. Which was very much different that what the Jews were promised or expecting. And if the spiritual kingdom was the intended purpose. What was the purpise of a physical appearance. Why did Jesus had to fail to succeed?
Why is it only the Christians accept this nonsense when they have not produced a prophet after they created the Church. Whereas Judaism and Islam had the benefit of prophets who rejected the concept of resurrection from the beginning.

Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity.

Kathleen Taylor, Neuroscientist, Says Religious Fundamentalism Could Be Treated As A Mental Illness
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO.

And you thought that was not possible. Never underestimate your own stupidity.

What did I think was not possible, Hari?
You don't read very well.
You didn't think it was possible for me to speak like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO. And yet here you are complimenting me by saying :" Spoken like the true (self appointed) Christian Champion of DDO."

I didn't believe that sentiments like; "Resurrection defies and contradicts science. If the Christians have to invent this highly improbable story of resurrection to make their saviour more credible, it is both illogical and contradictory to their intentions. That was not far enough, they had to invent the virgin birth and the miracles of Jesus and a Trinity to add to the profundity". seemed like a true championing of the christian cause.

As their Christian Champion I am obliged to admonish Christians when they show ignorance and poor scholarship.

Obliged by whom?

You are still too stuck on stupid. Any defender of a faith is obliged to maintain the truth about the faith he chose to defend.

So you are the Queen of
Elihu
Posts: 87
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2016 4:52:43 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 4/3/2016 4:45:47 PM, Harikrish wrote:

And the majority of Bibles if not all interpreted it the same way. Your scriptural ignorance cannot be defended by a code of conduct. You will need something stronger like real scriptural knowledge.
I am not sure how it is scriptural ignorance to simply point out the fact. The fact being that all Greek manuscripts prior to the 9th century had no punctuation. Therefore, any and all punctuation is interpretation. To say that the comma can go before or after the "today" is completely within reason.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
(John 4:24)