Islam, religion of Love...

Posted 869 day(s) ago by zevogolf9412 Views 231 Replies
Results 201 to 232 of 232
Page 5 of 5 3 4 5
  1. #201
    Originally Posted by Sooners View Post
    "For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him." (Acts 10:34-35)

    There is an influx of Christians the world over answering the call to unitedly proclaim the "good news" of God's Kingdom which will soon remove all the governments of this world, and it itself replace all of them.


    "And it must occur in the final part of the days [that] the mountain of the house of Jehovah will become firmly established above the top of the mountains, and it will certainly be lifted up above the hills; and to it all the nations must stream." (Isaiah 2:2)

    "And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come." (Matthew 24:14)

    "...the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;" (Daniel 2:44)

    Then God’s Kingdom will usher in an earthly paradise. Mankind will be blessed - those of European ancestry, African ancestry, and of Asiatic ancestry.

    “Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his peoples. And God himself will be with them. And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away.” (Revelation 21:3,4)

    "And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more; And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be. But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth, And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace...The righteous themselves will possess the earth, And they will reside forever upon it." (Psalm 37:10-11,29)
    If you were born before the days of Jesus Christ, where would your sole currently reside? Would it be beside a sign which reads "you're not allowed, signed, BMOC" A person's right to enter the kingdom of heaven is not based on a probability or chance or luck nor being in the right place at the right time. I'll explain it in the most simplest of terms, "you don't get to decide what is on the sign." And on a side note, do you ever address people as Tim? I think you do!

  2. #202
    Originally Posted by bruthaman View Post
    You should trust no mans explanation on religion.
    Nope, you should trust mine. It is the only explanation that fits with logic and reason.

    However, my explanation doesn't require the rejection of logic and reason in the name of faith so it might not be comfortable for religious people.

  3. #203
    Originally Posted by sheepdogs View Post
    If you were born before the days of Jesus Christ, where would your sole currently reside? Would it be beside a sign which reads "you're not allowed, signed, BMOC" A person's right to enter the kingdom of heaven is not based on a probability or chance or luck nor being in the right place at the right time. I'll explain it in the most simplest of terms, "you don't get to decide what is on the sign." And on a side note, do you ever address people as Tim? I think you do!
    What are you talking about? Are you drinking or something? Really I am not being sarcastic. My sole? My shoes? Buh..!?

    "you don't get to decide what is on the sign."
    This makes no sense. Again, I am not poking fun at you. I simply don't know what in the world you are talking about.

    And on a side note, do you ever address people as Tim?
    Again, what...?

  4. #204
    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    Nope, you should trust mine. It is the only explanation that fits with logic and reason.

    However, my explanation doesn't require the rejection of logic and reason in the name of faith so it might not be comfortable for religious people.
    What explanation...? You've done nothing but make rash accusations after which you then promptly bury your head in the sand, hoping the guy calling your bluff on scientific issues goes away.

  5. #205
    Originally Posted by Sooners View Post
    What are you talking about? Are you drinking or something? Really I am not being sarcastic. My sole? My shoes? Buh..!?


    This makes no sense. Again, I am not poking fun at you. I simply don't know what in the world you are talking about.


    Again, what...?
    Pardon me for misspelling a word, Francis of Assisi, but you could not be more full of crap. Perhaps you need a larger divinity cup for the excess excrement. What is it that you don't quite grasp? Like most people, they are the religion of their parents. Do you disagree? Now since most parents are not Christian that makes most children other faiths than Christianity. Again, do you disagree? So if you are a Christian and you are the faith of your parents then your believed salvation and invite into the kingdom of heaven is based on the chance that your parents are in fact of the Christian faith. How could you or anyone possibly look into the eyes of non Christian children and think that they are not welcome to your party when your participation in this supposed shindig is purely based on luck? So the entrance into heaven has nothing to do with luck, probability, chance or being in the right place at the right time and this would be apparent to anyone who could look beyond their own simpleton inflated ego. And don't you ever tire of being yourself. This reminds me of a Chevy Chase movie.

  6. #206
    Sancho's Avatar
    Posts
    4,980
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Land of milk and honey

    Back to the topic at hand, Islam is a piece of shit religion suitable for the most piss-ignorant, backwards, and intolerant people on Earth. No wonder the likes of bruthman flock to it.

  7. #207
    Originally Posted by sheepdogs View Post
    Pardon me for misspelling a word, Francis of Assisi, but you could not be more full of crap. What is it that you don't quite grasp?
    You said "where would your sole currently reside? Would it be beside a sign..?" I thought you were saying would I be standing on the soles of my shoes near a sign...

    I went back and re-read it... (sorry I am really sleepy)... No, that's actually a very good question.

    Job was a faithful servant of God who lived a long, long time before Jesus. What Job said about Sheol [the common grave] gives us an understanding of what the condition of the dead involves.

    While the Greek teaching of the immortality of the human soul infiltrated Jewish religious thinking in later centuries, the Bible record shows that Sheol refers to mankind’s common grave as a place where there is no consciousness. (Ec 9:4-6, 10) Those in Sheol neither praise God nor mention him. (Ps 6:4, 5; Isa 38:17-19) Yet it cannot be said that it simply represents ‘a condition of being separated from God,’ since the Scriptures render such a teaching untenable by showing that Sheol is “in front of” him, and that God is in effect “there.” (Pr 15:11; Ps 139:7, 8; Am 9:1, 2) For this reason Job, longing to be relieved of his suffering, prayed that he might go to Sheol and later be remembered by Jehovah and be called out from Sheol.—Job 14:12-15.

    On the day of Pentecost 33 C.E., the apostle Peter quoted from Psalm 16:10 and applied it to Christ Jesus. Luke, in quoting Peter’s words, used the Greek word hai′des, thereby showing that Sheol and Hades refer to the same thing, mankind’s common grave. (Ac 2:25-27, 29-32) During the Thousand Year Reign of Jesus Christ, Sheol, or Hades, is emptied and destroyed, through a resurrection of all of those in it.—Re 20:13, 14;

    Everyone who is in Sheol or Hades will be resurrected in the future. Jesus tells us "Do not marvel at this, because the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out"(John 5:28-29)

    "and I have hope toward God, which hope these [men] themselves also entertain, that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous." (Acts 24:15)

    What it boils down to is that everyone is going to get a fair shake from God. Someone who lived well before the time of Christ certainly is not without an opportunity for salvation just because of when he was born in the stream of time.

  8. #208
    OkieforOU's Avatar
    Posts
    2,524
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Eastern Oklahoma

    Thanks Sooners. Very intelligent discussion of the scripture. .

  9. #209
    Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    Back to the topic at hand, Islam is a piece of shit religion suitable for the most piss-ignorant, backwards, and intolerant people on Earth. No wonder the likes of bruthman flock to it.
    You are the definition of a christian.....LOL.

  10. #210
    Sancho's Avatar
    Posts
    4,980
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Land of milk and honey

    Originally Posted by bruthaman View Post
    You are the definition of a christian.....LOL.
    Yeah, other than the whole not being religious at all thing...

  11. #211
    Originally Posted by OkieforOU View Post
    Thanks Sooners. Very intelligent discussion of the scripture. .
    What's sad is that everyone is being so crass that I have no idea if you are making fun of me or are seriously speaking adult to adult here... lol

  12. #212
    Originally Posted by Sancho View Post
    Yeah, other than the whole not being religious at all thing...
    That's how most quote-unquote Christians are too...
    Last edited by Sooners; June 15th, 2012 at 05:32 AM.

  13. #213
    Originally Posted by OkieforOU View Post
    Thanks Sooners. Very intelligent discussion of the scripture. .
    don't get sucked in..

  14. #214
    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    don't get sucked in..
    Sucked into what, a bible discussion...?
    Last edited by Sooners; June 15th, 2012 at 05:15 AM.

  15. #215
    Originally Posted by Sooners View Post
    Sucked into what, a bible discussion...?
    sucked into believing your "interpretations"..

  16. #216
    "For Jehovah himself gives wisdom; out of his mouth there are knowledge and discernment. And for the upright ones he will treasure up practical wisdom; for those walking in integrity he is a shield, by observing the paths of judgment, and he will guard the very way of his loyal ones. In that case you will understand righteousness and judgment and uprightness, the entire course of what is good." (Proverbs 2:6-9)

    I am merely discussing the scriptures. It is God himself who gives wisdom to right-hearted ones.

    "True wisdom itself keeps crying aloud in the very street. In the public squares it keeps giving forth its voice. At the upper end of the noisy streets it calls out. At the entrances of the gates into the city it says its own sayings..." (Proverbs 1:20, 21)

  17. #217
    Originally Posted by Sooners View Post
    What explanation...? You've done nothing but make rash accusations after which you then promptly bury your head in the sand, hoping the guy calling your bluff on scientific issues goes away.
    I didn't make any rash accusations in this thread. I only stated facts backed up by the bible or Quran.

    Now for my explanation?

    There may or may not be a god or gods. We don't know. But if there is, mankind's attempts at defining those gods are all wrong.

  18. #218
    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    I didn't make any rash accusations in this thread. I only stated facts backed up by the bible or Quran.

    Now for my explanation?

    There may or may not be a god or gods. We don't know. But if there is, mankind's attempts at defining those gods are all wrong.
    how can you be so sure?

    what about mankind's attempt to "understand/comprehend" God's will?

  19. #219
    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    how can you be so sure?

    what about mankind's attempt to "understand/comprehend" God's will?
    Are the gospels contradicting in any manner or are they the very same account? If they are the very same account then why is there more than one? If they are contradicting then would this not cause confusion rather than a mutual understanding?

  20. #220
    Originally Posted by sheepdogs View Post
    Are the gospels contradicting in any manner or are they the very same account? If they are the very same account then why is there more than one? If they are contradicting then would this not cause confusion rather than a mutual understanding?
    they are different accounts that do not contradict...

  21. #221
    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    they are different accounts that do not contradict...
    So let me ask you a few questions of your gospel that doesn't contradict.

    Who first witnessed the empty tomb?

    Was the leper healed before or after Jesus visited the house?

    Did Jesus instruct his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey?

    When did the fig tree wither? Immediately or the next day?

    Who was the father of Joseph?

    To whom did Jesus give the lord's prayer?

    When did Satan enter Judas?

  22. #222
    i have a better idea...
    read them yourself...and post specific scriptures you believe contradict...
    don't believe everything you read on atheist websites....

  23. #223
    Originally Posted by 87sooner View Post
    i have a better idea...
    read them yourself...and post specific scriptures you believe contradict...
    don't believe everything you read on atheist websites....
    I have better idea. Don't dodge the questions. These are very simple questions. All answerable by only using your non-contradictory gospel.

  24. #224
    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    I have better idea. Don't dodge the questions. These are very simple questions. All answerable by only using your non-contradictory gospel.
    yes....they are....but i don't have time to hunt down every verse of each gospel....to complete your assignment....
    but i will take the first one...just to show you there is no contradiction...

    Who first witnessed the empty tomb?
    mary magdalene is mentioned in all 4 gospels...as one of the first to encounter the empty tomb.
    mary.....mother of Jesus is mentioned in a couple of the gospels
    salome is mentioned in one....
    luke says "the women"....mentions joanna....and "the others"...

    so it's pretty clear there was a group....of women
    and clearly...no contradiction...

    i will gladly answer your other questions if you provide the scripture references....

    the gospels are accounts of Jesus life/death/resurrection from the perspectives of 4 different people....
    do you really believe that if one mentions "joanna" visiting Jesus' empty tomb...and another doesn't....that somehow proves the accounts are contradictory and therefore false?
    you are........as they say....grasping at straws...
    Last edited by 87sooner; June 16th, 2012 at 06:33 PM.

  25. #225
    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    I didn't make any rash accusations in this thread. I only stated facts backed up by the bible or Quran.

    Now for my explanation?

    There may or may not be a god or gods. We don't know. But if there is, mankind's attempts at defining those gods are all wrong.
    I could not agree with you more when you say that "if there is, [generally] mankind's attempts at defining those gods are all wrong." (brackets, mine)

  26. #226
    Originally Posted by sheepdogs View Post
    Are the gospels contradicting in any manner or are they the very same account? If they are the very same account then why is there more than one? If they are contradicting then would this not cause confusion rather than a mutual understanding?
    If there were four witnesses in a criminal case that could provide an alibi for the accused, do you think the defense would choose to put all four on the stand or just use one...?

    The four Gospels (the word “Gospel” meaning “good news”), written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, give us a fourfold historical account of the life and activity of Jesus, each account being an independent report. The first three of these are sometimes called synoptic (meaning “like view”) because they have a relatively similar approach to Jesus’ ministry in comparison with John’s Gospel, yet each reflects individualism on the part of the writer. John’s Gospel fills in certain details omitted by the other three.

    One gospel can differ from the next, and yet not be contradictory, but complimentary.

  27. #227
    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    So let me ask you a few questions of your gospel that doesn't contradict.

    Who first witnessed the empty tomb?
    After Jesus’ burial, Mary Magdalene and other women went to prepare ****es and perfumed oil before the Sabbath began at sundown. Then following the Sabbath, at the break of dawn, on the first day of the week, Mary and the other women brought the perfumed oil to the tomb. (Mt 28:1; Mr 15:47; 16:1, 2; Lu 23:55, 56; 24:1) When Mary saw the tomb was open and apparently empty, she rushed off to tell the startling news to Peter and John, who ran to the tomb. (Joh 20:1-4)

    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    Was the leper healed before or after Jesus visited the house?
    NOTE: I assume you are speaking about "Simon the leper". If not please direct me to the account(s) you are questioning.

    It seems that these events occurred on Nisan 9 (Jewish calendar) of 33 C.E.

    The details of this feast are presented in three of the four Gospels. (Matthew 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9; John 12:2-8) Matthew and Mark mention that feast after telling about Jesus’ triumphal ride into Jerusalem, his cursing of the barren fig tree, and his reply to the apostles’ question about the conclusion of the system of things. Both Matthew and Mark follow the account of the feast with Judas’ dealing with Jewish leaders about betraying Jesus. The positioning of the meal in these two accounts would suggest that it occurred on Nisan 12, just two days before Jesus’ betrayal and execution on Nisan 14. So the feast has been dated Nisan 12 on many charts showing the events of Jesus’ life, but is this correct?

    In John chapter 12 the meal at Simon’s house is put in a different setting. John 12:1 reports that Jesus arrived in Bethany near Jerusalem “six days before the passover,” which would be Nisan 8. Then verses 2-8 describe an evening meal in Bethany, and verses 9-11 tell us that Jews who heard that Jesus was near came out to see him. Verses 12-15 say that “the next day” Christ triumphantly entered Jerusalem. (Compare Acts 20:7-11.) Hence, John 12:1-15 indicates that the meal at Simon’s house was on Nisan 9 in the evening, which according to the Jewish calendar would mark the start of the new day, followed in the daylight portion of that day (Nisan 9) by Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem.

    Of these two possibilities, the second seems weightier. Why? Well, let us compare the accounts and their context. Neither Matthew nor Mark give any date for the feast in Simon’s house. They do, though, show that at that feast complaining arose over Mary’s use of costly oil, complaining that John indicates was led by greedy Judas. (Matthew 26:8, 9; Mark 14:4, 5; John 12:4-6) As we noted, both Matthew and Mark follow the episode of the feast with Judas’ approaching the priests to see how much he might be paid to betray Christ. Thus it could well be that Matthew and Mark for thematic reasons mention the feast where they did, linking one evidence of Judas’ greed with the ultimate expression of it.

    John, though, does give a specific date for the feast, indicating that he mentioned it in its chronological position. This supports the conclusion that the evening meal at Simon’s home followed Jesus’ arrival in Bethany on Nisan 8, 33 C.E. Further, recall John’s information that Jews who ‘got to know that Jesus was now in Bethany’ came from Jerusalem to see him and Lazarus, who also lived in Bethany and whose sisters were at the feast. This visit by Jews who had just then “got to know” of Jesus’ being in Bethany would more likely have occurred before his entry into Jerusalem, and it possibly contributed to the enthusiastic reception of Christ during his ride into the city “the next day,” the daytime of Nisan 9.

    While this may be a seemingly small, technical point, it illustrates how all of us can continue to grow in knowledge and understanding of the fine details in God’s Word.

    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    Did Jesus instruct his disciples to wear sandals and take a staff on their journey?
    Some contend that the three Gospel accounts that report on Jesus’ sending out the apostles contradict one another. By comparing these accounts, however, we can reach an interesting conclusion. First, compare what Mark and Luke wrote. Mark’s account says: “[Jesus] gave them orders to carry nothing for the trip except a staff alone, no bread, no food pouch, no copper money in their girdle purses, but to bind on sandals, and not to wear two undergarments.” (Mark 6:7-9) Luke recorded: “Carry nothing for the trip, neither staff nor food pouch, nor bread nor silver money; neither have two undergarments.” (Luke 9:1-3) Here we note the seeming contradiction. According to Mark, the apostles were told to carry a staff and to bind on sandals, but Luke’s record says that they were to carry nothing, not even a staff. Unlike Mark, Luke made no mention of sandals.

    To understand what Jesus wanted to convey on this occasion, note the expression common to all three Gospels. In the accounts just quoted as well as at Matthew 10:5-10, the apostles were told not to wear or to have “two undergarments.” Likely, each apostle was wearing one undergarment. So they were not to get another for the trip. Similarly, they were wearing sandals. Mark highlighted the need “to bind on sandals,” the sandals they were already wearing. How about staffs? The Jewish Encyclopedia notes: “It seems to have been the universal custom among the ancient Hebrews also to carry a staff.” (Gen. 32:10) Mark mentioned that the apostles were to “carry nothing for the trip” except the staff that they had with them when Jesus gave the command. Hence, the Gospel writers were emphasizing Jesus’ instruction not to go out of the way to get extra supplies for the trip.

    This point is further emphasized by Matthew, who heard Jesus’ command on this occasion and recorded it. Jesus said: “Do not procure gold or silver or copper for your girdle purses, or a food pouch for the trip, or two undergarments, or sandals or a staff; for the worker deserves his food.” (Matt. 10:9, 10) What about the sandals that the apostles were wearing and the staffs that they had in their hands? Jesus did not say to throw away what they already had, but he was telling them not to procure such things. Why did he give such a command? Because “the worker deserves his food.” That was the thrust of Jesus’ command, which was in harmony with his exhortation in the Sermon on the Mount that they not be anxious about what they would eat, drink, or wear.—Matt. 6:25-32.

    Though the Gospel accounts may at first seem to be contradictory, they were all covering the same point. The apostles were to go as they were and not be distracted by procuring anything extra. Why? Because Jehovah would provide for them.

    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    When did the fig tree wither? Immediately or the next day?
    JESUS and his disciples have just spent their third night in Bethany since arriving from Jericho. Now the early morning light of Monday, Nisan 10, finds them already on the road to Jerusalem. Jesus is hungry. So when he catches sight of a fig tree with leaves, he goes over to it to see whether it might have some figs.

    The tree’s leaves are unseasonally early, since the season for figs is not until June, and it is now only late March. However, Jesus evidently feels that since the leaves are early, the figs might also be early. But he is disappointed. The leaves have given the tree a deceptive appearance. Jesus then curses the tree, saying: “Let no one eat fruit from you anymore forever.” The consequences of Jesus’ action and its significance are learned the following morning.

    Continuing on, Jesus and his disciples soon reach Jerusalem. He goes to the temple, which he had inspected the previous afternoon. Today, however, he takes action, just as he did three years earlier when he came to the Passover in 30 C.E. Jesus throws out those selling and buying in the temple and overturns the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. He does not even allow anyone to carry a utensil through the temple.

    Now, early Tuesday morning, Nisan 11, he and his disciples are on the road again. This proves to be a crucial day of Jesus’ ministry, the busiest thus far. It is the last day he appears in the temple. And it is the last day of his public ministry before his trial and execution.

    Jesus and his disciples take the same route over the Mount of Olives toward Jerusalem. Along that road from Bethany, Peter notices the tree that Jesus cursed the previous morning. “Rabbi, see!” he exclaims, “the fig tree that you cursed has withered up.”

    To understand how the sequence of events transpired, regarding the Jesus' withering of the fig tree and his purging of the temple, we must examine three separate events. First on the morning of Nisan 10 (Monday), while walking on the road toward Jerusalem from Bethany, the apostles observe Jesus curse the fig tree. Later in the day, still on Nisan 10, Jesus purges the temple of those selling and buying. The next morning of Nisan 11 (Tuesday), Jesus and his apostles are again walking from Bethany to Jerusalem when Peter notices the fig tree has withered which Jesus had cursed the previous day.

    While Mark writes of the three events in separate chronological order, Matthew apparently chooses to describe the fig tree's cursing and subsequent withering together, and then to move on to the account of Jesus' purging of the temple.

    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    Who was the father of Joseph?
    Joseph, son of a certain Jacob; adoptive father of Christ Jesus, husband of Mary, and later, the natural father of at least four sons, James, Joseph, Simon, and Judas, besides daughters. (Mt 1:16; 13:55, 56; Lu 4:22; Joh 1:45; 6:42) Joseph was also called the son of Heli (Lu 3:23), this evidently being the name of his father-in-law. Heli was the father of Mary and maternal grandfather of Jesus Christ. (Lu 3:23) Joseph’s being called the “son of Heli” is understood to mean that he was the son-in-law of Heli. Why is this so that Joseph would be called "son of Heli"? To understand this, we must examine the difference in Luke's genealogy of Jesus Christ from Matthew's genealogy of Jesus Christ.

    The difference in nearly all the names in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus as compared with Matthew’s is quickly resolved in the fact that Luke traced the line through David’s son Nathan, instead of Solomon as did Matthew. (Lu 3:31; Mt 1:6, 7) Luke evidently follows the ancestry of Mary, thus showing Jesus’ natural descent from David, while Matthew shows Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David by descent from Solomon through Joseph, who was legally Jesus’ father. Both Matthew and Luke signify that Joseph was not Jesus’ actual father but only his adoptive father, giving him legal right. Matthew departs from the style used throughout his genealogy when he comes to Jesus, saying: “Jacob became father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.” (Mt 1:16) Notice that he does not say ‘Joseph became father to Jesus’ but that he was “the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born.” Luke is even more pointed when, after showing earlier that Jesus was actually the Son of God by Mary (Lu 1:32-35), he says: “Jesus . . . being the son, as the opinion was, of Joseph, son of Heli.”—Lu 3:23.

    Since Jesus was not the natural son of Joseph but was the Son of God, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus would prove that he was, by human birth, a son of David through his natural mother Mary. Regarding the genealogies of Jesus given by Matthew and by Luke, Frederic Louis Godet wrote: “This study of the text in detail leads us in this way to admit—1. That the genealogical register of Luke is that of Heli, the grandfather of Jesus; 2. That, this affiliation of Jesus by Heli being expressly opposed to His affiliation by Joseph, the document which he has preserved for us can be nothing else in his view than the genealogy of Jesus through Mary. But why does not Luke name Mary, and why pass immediately from Jesus to His grandfather? Ancient sentiment did not comport with the mention of the mother as the genealogical link. Among the Greeks a man was the son of his father, not of his mother; and among the Jews the adage was: ‘Genus matris non vocatur genus [“The descendant of the mother is not called (her) descendant”]’ (‘Baba bathra,’ 110, a).”—Commentary on Luke, 1981, p. 129.

    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    To whom did Jesus give the lord's prayer?
    Matthew’s account of the sermon on the mount is about four times as long as Luke’s. Moreover, portions of what Matthew records, Luke presents as being said by Jesus at another time during his ministry, as can be noted by comparing Matthew 6:9-13 with Luke 11:1-4, and Matthew 6:25-34 with Luke 12:22-31. Yet this should not be surprising. Jesus obviously taught the same things more than once, and Luke chose to record some of these teachings in a different setting.

    Originally Posted by theskipster View Post
    When did Satan enter Judas?
    Satan is twice spoken of as "entering" Judas. These are two separate and distinct occurrences.

    On Nisan 11, Jesus Christ had rebuked the religious leaders publicly, and he realizes that they are seeking to kill him. On Nisan 12, while the religious leaders are wickedly conspiring to kill Jesus, they receive a visitor. To their surprise, it is one of Jesus’ own apostles, Judas Iscariot, the one into whom Satan has implanted the base idea of betraying his Master! How pleased they are when Judas inquires: “What will you give me to betray him to you?” They gladly agree to pay him 30 silver pieces, the price of a slave according to the Mosaic Law covenant.

    "But Satan entered into Judas, the one called Is·car′i·ot, who was numbered among the twelve; and he went off and talked with the chief priests and [temple] captains about the effective way to betray him to them." (Luke 22:3, 4)

    Later, on the night of the last supper, Jesus Christ explains: “One of you will betray me.” The apostles begin to grieve and say to Jesus one by one: “It is not I, is it?” Even Judas Iscariot joins in asking. John, who is lying next to Jesus at the table, leans back on Jesus’ breast and asks: “Lord, who is it?”

    “It is one of the twelve, who is dipping with me into the common bowl,” Jesus answers. “True, the Son of man is going away, just as it is written concerning him, but woe to that man through whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been finer for that man if he had not been born.” After that, Satan again enters Judas, taking advantage of the opening in his heart, which has become wicked.

    So the latter leaned back upon the breast of Jesus and said to him: “Lord, who is it?” Therefore Jesus answered: “It is that one to whom I shall give the morsel that I dip.” And so, having dipped the morsel, he took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Is·car′i·ot. And after the morsel then Satan entered into the latter. Jesus, therefore, said to him: “What you are doing get done more quickly.” (John 13:25-27)
    Last edited by Sooners; June 17th, 2012 at 01:00 AM.

  28. #228
    OkieforOU's Avatar
    Posts
    2,524
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Eastern Oklahoma

    Originally Posted by Sooners View Post
    What's sad is that everyone is being so crass that I have no idea if you are making fun of me or are seriously speaking adult to adult here... lol
    Sad commentary on the nature of these discussions. I have very much enjoyed this discussion in that it consists in an attempt to get at the truth rather than repeated attacks on Christianity. I've learned a lot reading the arguments you and Chris presented. Hope for more in the future.
    I will start some threads. Hope you return and participate.

  29. #229
    Originally Posted by OkieforOU View Post
    Sad commentary on the nature of these discussions. I have very much enjoyed this discussion in that it consists in an attempt to get at the truth rather than repeated attacks on Christianity. I've learned a lot reading the arguments you and Chris presented. Hope for more in the future.
    I will start some threads. Hope you return and participate.
    Always, mah homie...

  30. #230
    SarasotaSooner's Avatar
    Posts
    5,975
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Sarasota, FL

    Re: Islam, religion of Love...

    Zevo was banned for that?

  31. #231
    Nazgul's Avatar
    Posts
    2,267
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Minas Morgul

    why was the link removed? c'mon he didn't force anybody to see it. he ain't mooslem

  32. #232
    okie52's Avatar
    Posts
    7,488
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Edmond, OK

    Zevo banned?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: October 26th, 2013, 10:30 PM