Monday, 19 July 2010
Sam Shamoun's Mother and Protecting Sam Shamoun from Abuse
Sam Shamoun’s Mother is Sick
UPDATE: Sam Shamoun invited me to rebuke a user on YouTube (JochenKatzz) who is abusing Sam's mother whilst taunting him. This is not on, it is unacceptable and insensitive to an extreme.
I rebuke Jochenkatzz and appeal to his sense of decency whilst asking him to stop harassing Sam Shamoun.
Sadly the internet is full of trolls, I have come to meet many Atheist trolls who act in a similar fashion.
It is interesting to note Sam turned to Muslims (myself and Jibreelk) to help him out with this problem...it shows Sam knows in his heart that Muslims are not these nasty people he and his colleagues have been portraying us as. Sam, in the company of the right-wing blood thirsty briagade of extreme Christians may traduce the name of Muslims but in his heart he knows Muslims are not all that bad...if they are good enough to protect him then they certainly are not as bad as he makes out. Food for thought.
OK, I just checked my mail and somebody has informed me Sam Shamoun’s mother is sick.
Despite Muslims recently rebuking and correcting Sam Shamoun we should never give up hope as Omar converted to Islam whilst on his way to KILL the Prophet Muhammad (p), thus Sam shamoun can still be guided; he needs to open his heart and become sincere
May Allah guide them.
Despite Sam Shamoun’s transgressions and misinformation about Islam we should still follow the conduct of the Prophet.
The Prophet was met with a lady who used to throw rubbish at him as he walked passed her house, this was a regular occurrence. One day this lady was not there to throw the rubbish at Muhammed so Muhammed enquired about her and was told she was ill; he visited her and she converted to Islam.
Recently I wrote in a YouTube video comment section of IslamResponses whilst discussing Sam Shamoun:
I think Sam Shamoun needs love, if we can get a team of sincere Muslims out to sit with Sam and help him as well as preach the Word and Truth to him perhaps Shamoun will convert and redirect his life. He needs love, at the moment he surrounds himself with sycophants and yes men who don't care about him but rather use him to further their right wing agendas of hatred against Muslims and Islam.
ChrisitianPrince is in the same boat...both Shamoun and CP share traits and circumstances
Maybe this is an opportunity for Sam Shamoun to realize the beauty of the Islamic people through self-refelction and inner-searching
On a personal note, I was due to address Sam Shamoun via a video/blog post so I will delay that (if not completely scrap it). I have now revised this intention and will now endeavour to produce the correction related to Sam Shamoun despite his personal circumstances as his misinformation may negatively affect somebody's salvation.
My message to the Muslims is thus:
I know Sam Shamoun may have caused you personal grief via his insults, taunts and mockeries but I ask you to never give up. I know many of you are pious (people I would truly call the brothers/sisters of Jesus) so your prayers for their guidance would be encouraged.
Guidance is the true healing
I would like to thank the person (a Muslim) who informed me and suggested an Islamic post related to this trying situation, he has a kind heart, may Allah bless him further, ameen.
For the story of Prophet Muhammed and the old woman see:
http://www.islamawareness.net/Children/story20.html
For more info on Islam, see:
http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/intro_islam.htm
May Allah send more peace and blessings on Prophet Muhammed and all other Prophets. Ameen
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
77 comments:
Why do you end your post capitalizing on a health concern with Sam's Mom by saying, "May Allah send more peace and blessings on Prophet Muhammed..."?
Does your prophet lack perfect peace and blessing in Allah's presence? We know he lacked perfect peace and assurance on earth, but why does he still require your prayers today to fill up the measure of what he lacks by way of peace and blessing?
And if he still needs to be prayed for, what hope does the average Muslim have who isn't even as great as Muslims (falsely) think Muhammad was?
And since you guys have been praying for peace and blessings to be upon Muhammad for over a thousand years now, why would Sam care that you guys are offering up such ineffective prayers for his mother?
How much better it is to pray through and in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the one who is able to save to the uttermost those who call upon God through Him.
Charles,
The Muslim dua (supplication) is a powerful tool to have in your toll kit.
Jesus (pbuh) prayed in a direct style, just like Muhammed (pbuh) and we follow this direct style which has no intermediates.
Your style of prayer is not direct...try praying to God alone..this is the way Jesus prayed and you shall (InshaAllah) notice the difference
Try it tonight...let me know how it goes.
Notice author doesn't pray for healing rather his so called guidance which he cannot defend in public.
no wonder his prophet's guidance couldn't save himself from the poison he had,besides he pseudo medicine also dint work i.e dates
SAM shamoun's mother doesn't need Allah guidance but grace and touch from Jesus...
Allah couldn't heal anyone in the quran..rather used Jesus hearings to claim for himself.
His mother will only be healed in Jesus name...
Allah doesn't exit to do such a thing
SAM will be back to destroy Islam and its evil.
and as for SNOW's ignorance of direct prayer
perhaps hes never read this
Joh 5:23 The Father wants all people to honor the Son as much as they honor him. When anyone refuses to honor the Son, that is the same as refusing to honor the Father who sent him.
Joh 5:26 The Father has the power to give life, and he has given that same power to the Son.
Joh 16:23 When that time comes, you won't have to ask me about anything. I tell you for certain that the Father will give you whatever you ask for in my name.
No wonder why hes running away from public debates
i pray in Jesus name That SAM's mother be healed by grace from the one true God(not allah)Supernaturally
i've always heard of christians praying for people of other faiths. countless examlples include when a natural disaster happens, christians instead of aid spread propoganda. an article in the hindu times reported that police would be cracking down on these people.
i wish christians drop their lying and cheating of the muslim faith, (though philippians 1:18 justifies it)
Amen, VJ.
Although Yahya ignored the actual point of my post, either because he didn't understand it or because he didn't know how to respond to it, nevertheless you have replied to him quite well.
VJ,
We all need Allah, he is our Creator.
As for your quoting of the Gospel of John
Joh 5:23
Joh 5:26 .
Joh 16:23
I must tell you the quotes are in the same style as the narrator thus rendering the quotes unreliable as they seem to be concoctions by whoever authoredqthe gospel of John.
however, it gets verse as I have just got finished listening to some Dr Ehrman and he points out that Jesus never claimed to be God in any of the Synoptic Gospels yet in the Gospel of John (strangely enough) you have unsubstantiated and untrustworth quotes (from a historical and thelogical perspective)...so your quoting from the Gospel of John is in vain...it does not prove anything
The Gospel of John can be dismissed as a forgery (well at least all the "quotes" claiming divinity)
I do plan to do a blog artcile on this issue but in the time being it would be well worth your time if popped over to TGV's blog and viewed his latest post
Peace
Christians, continue to say "Islam will be destroyed". You aren't fooling anyone. Islam's power cannot be matched and the guided ones can see.
I do know christian haters who embraced islam, maybe the ones spamming up this blog are next (inshallah).
Furthermore, it only adds to the evidence that Islam is the one true religion. When people make hate/racist attacks, I only get reminded that this precious faith is blinded to others.
What in the world, Sam asked Yahya?
Sam, Im praying for your mom.
Anonymousing
Contrary to what you may believe many christians recognise me as somebody who tries to be fair and DO confide in me or ask favours from me
If you are a Christian (anonymousing) I would like to tell you I was one of the first (if not the first) theist to stand up against a man named Brett Keane who was burning the bible in in a YouTube video.
I rebuked this man as people's religious books should not be discredited in such a fashion. This man was an Atheist, FYI.
Peace
@womenfortruth
I do know christian haters who embraced islam, maybe the ones spamming up this blog are next (inshallah).
Furthermore, it only adds to the evidence that Islam is the one true religion. When people make hate/racist attacks, I only get reminded that this precious faith is blinded to others.
I completely agree. I personally think many of these haters act in the way they do is becuase Islam is impossible to refute...this leads to frustration on their part hence the hatred.
Here is an ex-Christian lady (who converted to Islam) giving her testimony and story of being a hater of Islam in Pal Talk and then converting to Islam on Pal Talk. Amazing, the Lord works in Amazing ways
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDKyPHRX1o4
Anonymousing,
You can be sure Sam did not ask Yahya in the way Yahya has implied. I am sure that Sam pointed out to Yahya that it is inconsistent to drag his name through the mud for rebuking Muslims for their many blasphemies and not at the same time rebuke Muslims for those very blasphemies. In other words, it is exceedingly unlikely that Sam turned to Yahya to help him out because Yahya is such a stand up guy.
Yahya is not a reliable idividual, and contrary to his ego, Christians do not hold him in high regard.
Yahya,
As for your claims about John's Gospel, let me first thank you for coming clean on this one and admitting that John's Gospel presents Jesus identifying Himself as God.
As for your attempts to undermine the apostolic integrity of John's Gospel, simply appealing to Bart Ehrman doesn't cut it. Just as one can find scholars who agree with him, so one can find other scholars who do not. A simple appeal to authority in this case is a fallacious one. And if it comes down to an appeal to authority, Christians believe the authority of God speaking in the Scriptures is greater than that of any man.
As a Muslim, you should agree with this. And since your Qur'an does not teach that the Christian Scriptures are forgeries or corrupted, you shouldn't make arguments that assert or argue for the very opposite.
Charles
However Sam meant it...he still wanted us to HELP him get this troll off his back via our rebukes.
Charles, may I remind you thta you do not speak for all Christians...you and a few of your pals may not like me for my oppostion to Wood and Qureishi...but that is not excuse for your generalisation.
I try to work with christians and whenever we have discourse it is always fruitful and never done in the style of the extreme Christians on the internet (ie Christian Prince, David Wood, Sam Shamoun, etc)
charles, the fact you are allowed to insult me is testimony to a fairer approach I attempt to adopt...certainly alot fairer than Sam or CP.
Think about it
Peace
Charles,
My appeal is not basedon Ehrman alone
In fact this view regarding the Gospel of John has been around for some time...I have been aware of it for a while (ie the quotes within the Goespel of John being considered unrelaible as they are in the same style of the narrator)
So my appeal is to that very fact...Ehrman and other scholars will base the opinion of a lack of reliability on this fact (amongst other issues pertaining to the narrative)...thus it is a view based on something more substantial than mere authority.
In any case, no responsible authority merely purveys opinion without something to hang it on.
the Jesus seminar may very well have discredited your branch of christianity (I assume you are a "Bible-believing-Christian in its truest sense?) by deconstructing the Bible.
we just don't have Q but we are certain it existed...why don't we not have Q?
We have your earliest Gospel Mark which really does not havea claim of divinity in it...thus doing the basic math we do come to the view some form of evolution took place between the original teachings of Jesus and the teachings with the Gospel of John..theological evolution? Yes.
Toporov has the right idea in my view...the NT is layered...the material in the gospels are more weightier than the material of Paul.
The narrative of the gospels is less valued than the quotes from Jesus but in the casw of the gospel of john, it is difficult to be sure whether they are quotes or fabrications on the part of the narrator (whomever the narrator maybe)
Peace
The way Sam meant it is what is important as far as Anonymousing's question goes. Furthermore, the way he meant it is significant to showing that you are not correct to imply that he is endorsing your character rather than calling on you to act according to your claims.
As for the Ehrman business, it doesn't matter if your claim isn't based on Ehrman alone but on that of other scholars in addition to him. Just like you can add scholars to the list of Biblical detractors, I can add scholars to the list of Biblical supporters.
As for the issue of John's style being the same as that of Jesus in the fourth Gospel, again this is just a claim (you haven't argued for it), and even if it were true it doesn't take into account the Christian view of inspiration, and it doesn't tell us which direction the dependence goes. Is John mimicking Jesus' style? Is John moulding Jesus' to his style? Does John have a message and select out of the many things that Jesus said and did the things that most set forth what John is concerned to convey, a fact that would account for much of the overlap in style and vocabulary? You simply have not considered such questions as these, much less dealt with them in any adequate way.
If you want to argue that John's Gospel is less reliable than Marks because it is (allegedly) later than the latter, then you are being arbitrary when you turn around and say the Synoptics are more reliable than Paul's writings since the earliest NT writings come from Paul.
In addition to a great many other problems that can be pointed out, the fact that the Old Testament and Jewish writings prior to the advent of the Messiah all foretell and show forth the expectation of a fully divine Messiah make much of this a moot point.
By the way, your failure to maintain scholarly objectivity is revealed when you, on the basis of Ehrman, point out that John's Gospel is unreliable, and then later turn around and restrict the unreliability of the Gospel to it's divinity claims. Ehrman is not at all arguing that the Gospel is unreliable except where it agrees with Islam (as you are obviously assuming here).
And just to point out a couple of other problems this would create for you....you simply can't turn the Jesus of the Gospels into a mere prophet just by removing direct claims to deity, for there are an incredible number of ways by which the Gospel of John (and the other Gospels, contrary to your claim) present Jesus saying and doing things which logically entail His divinity. In addition to this, it isn't just John's record of what Christ said about His deity that is problematic for Islam, for the Gospel of John (and the other Gospels) contradicts one or another aspect of Islam on virtually every page.
And once again, when you argue against the Bible as something unreliable, you are sawing off the branch you are sitting on. If the Gospels are unreliable, then your Qur'an is unreliable, for your Qur'an does not teach that the previous Scriptures are forgeries.
Indeed, even if the Qur'an did not endorse the previous Scriptures in toto, the Bible has to at least be reliable enough to trust what it says, otherwise it would not be possible to rely on the New Testament record of the Gospel provided by the apostles when searching for clear predictions of Muhammad, which the Qur'an claims can be found there (but which we both know cannot be found there).
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
Charles Martel you would happen name wouldn't happen to be a fawning over 'Charles the Hammer' would it? The Catholic Christian who defeated the Muslims at Tours? The same one who did a great job of using his sword to kill fellow Christians who were enemies of the Franks would it?
So I would assume that your a Catholic? It couldn't be that a reformed Christian would actually be fawning over a Roman Catholic has a hero who saved not only Gaul but all of Western Europe from Islam could it?
Well even so, as we can see the progress being made in France according to Pat Buchannon (another Catholic) it won't be long before France is majority Muslim. Read his book "The Death of the West".
Any how let me take a sip of this coffee before I proceed.
Charles the hammer as far as your question about our beloved Messenger (saw) goes are you sincerely seeking an answer?
In other words
a) there is an answer that Muslims can give that Muslims cherish that would be satisfactory.
b) you could give a damn less your here with your hammer and could care less about what Muslims say?
Charles can you give me an instance of where Jesus gave people faith in the New Testament?
Charles you asked Yahya,
"As for your attempts to undermine the apostolic integrity of John's Gospel, simply appealing to Bart Ehrman doesn't cut it. JUST AS ONE CAN FIND SCHOLARS WHO AGREE WITH HIM, SO ONE CAN FIND OTHER SCHOLARS WHO DO NOT. A simple appeal to authority in this case is a fallacious one"
Which scholars who are not Christians disagree with Bart Ehrman on this point Charles?
Maybe just a couple names would be real swell!
Charles you assert,
"As a Muslim, you should agree with this. And since your Qur'an does not teach that the Christian Scriptures are forgeries or corrupted, you shouldn't make arguments that assert or argue for the very opposite."
That is true that the Qur'an does not assert that Christian scriptures are forgeries, Yet I have yet to see a Christian who can show me where the Qur'an ask me to accept the 22 books of the New Testament?
Charles you asked,
"Does John have a message and SELECT OUT OF THE MANY THINGS THAT JESUS SAID AND DID THE THINGS THAT MOST SET FORTH WHAT JOHN IS CONCERNED TO CONVEY, a fact that would account for much of the overlap in style and vocabulary?"
"John" says, " But these are written that you may BELIEVE that Jesus is the Christ, THE SON OF GOD, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:21)
Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written. (John 21:25)
Wow! What a statement! Jesus did so much that even the library of congress couldn't contain it all!
Well I imagine so considering that the Holy Spirit never tickled anyone to write much about the first 30 years of his life on this earth.
Maybe Christians can give a hoot about what Jesus was doing for 30 years of his life on this planet but as a Muslim I'm very interested!
Seems to me that this Gospel did have an agenda and seems to me that it was in competition with other Gospels. It has a very clever sales pitch at the end.
If you want a Gospel that is going to get people to BELIEVE that Jesus is the Son of God well than look no further my friends!
Charles the hammer you said,
"And once again, when you argue against the Bible as something unreliable, you are sawing off the branch you are sitting on. IF THE GOSPELS ARE UNRELIABLE, THEN YOUR QUR'AN IS UNRELIABLE, for your Qur'an does not teach that the previous Scriptures are forgeries"
The Question before us is does the Qur'an identify what is the content of these 'previous scriptures'. Therefore if your New Testament is found to be fallacious the argument does not hold that the Qur'an is fallacious. Very poor reasoning, but I don't blame you I blame ACTS17, Sam Shamoun and the same arguments that have been reused and rehashed by the Zwemer Institute for Islamic Studies since the early 1900s.
Give it up already people!
Charles the hammer you said,
...."when searching for clear predictions of Muhammad, which the Qur'an claims can be found there....."
7:157 "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they
FIND MENTIONED in their own....."
1) Where does this text endorse the entire Bible?
2) Why would you say that he is not mentioned at all?
Luke 24:44He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is WRITTEN about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."
I have read the first five books of the Bible, what you call 'The Law of Moses' and I have never once seen anything written about Jesus there?
Are you claiming that Jesus lied when hes said 'WRITTEN ABOUT ME' or that there are allusions about him contained there in?
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
One more thing and it was very remiss of me in light of this blog entry.
I must admit that I am not a friend or fan of Sam Shamoun. With all the talk and garbage he has directed towards other people and their mothers I will say this if his mother is indeed ill may Allah (swt) grant her shifa(cure) may Allah make it easy upon her and may Allah make it easy upon their family in these challenging times.
Ameen ya Rahman Ameen Ya Raheem Ameen ya Lateef
thegrandverbalizer19,
Much of what you said is either irrelevant or uninteresting or otherwise not worth addressing. I will restrict my response to the substantial issues I raised that you managed to get around to.
First, you asked me where Jesus gave people faith in the NT. One verse that speaks to this is found in Matthew 11:
"All things have been handed over to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."
When you ask for scholars who disagree with Ehrman you show that you are still clinging to the very idea that I challenge. An appeal to authority is fallacious. It doesn't matter how many noses we can count; what matters are the relative merits of the case, i.e. actual arguments, that can be made for or against the reliability of the New Testament Gospels. If you think counting noses does the trick, then Islam is false and Christianity is true because more people believe the latter than believe the former. Do you really think this way?
Nevertheless, since I sense a touch of sarcasm in your voice as if you think it laughable that there are scholars on the other side that you, with all your boundless learning and wisdom, could be ignorant of, I will list some for you.
Yahya appealed to Ehrman saying Jesus never claimed to be God in the Synoptic Gospels, but men like the late great Princeton Theologian Benjamin Warfield concluded differently (see his book, The Lord of Glory). Dr. Robert Reymond in his book - Divine Messiah: The New Testament Witness, also concludes differently. Many others could be mentioned.
One of the things I find laughable about this whole approach, i.e. the attempt to limit the question to whether or not Jesus ever claimed to be God since the authors of the Gospel themselves cannot be trusted, is that it is through the testimony of the Gospel writers that we know what Jesus said and did. If the Gospel writers made up that Jesus was God, then they could just as easily make up sayings of Jesus to the effect that He is God. So the distinction is quite silly, as you can hopefully see.
CARE TO TELL WHERE DID SAM TELL U TO REBUKE JochenKatzz??
OR ARE U INVENTING THIS UP?
As for john's gospel why refer to erhman when u can also refer to Robert Spencer or David horowitz for Islam?
besides erhman believes the crucifixion why dont u accept that as well?double standards? or some taqquia?
besides do u dare to come out of the shell and debate real scholars like DR James white who defeated erhman publicly? and to defend you shoddy research in public.
i bet any apologist will eat you like a cake..
i think you already know this very well,that's the reason staying behind the veiled door and writing crap to mislead other.
its good decision of David wood to block such deceivers like you.
And finally for your first statement
we dont need Allah cause he doesn't exist,hence hes not qualified to create anything.
Peace from Christ the creator
VJ
As for your statement that you have never seen a anything in the Qur'an asking you to accept the 22 books of the New Testament, aside from revealing your ignorance of the Bible (there are 27 NT books), it shows an unwillingness to take full stock of what the Qur'an and other Muslim sources say about the Scriptures.
Rather than get into a protracted discussion about this, all that is necessary is to show that the Qur'an says, as in the passage you quoted, that Muhammad's coming is predicted in the previous Scriptures that are WITH the Jews and the Christians. That means not only that we have to be able to find Muhammad mentioned in the Scriptures, but it means that they have to be reliable enough to trust that these (alleged) predictions about Muhammad are what they actually wrote and intended.
Oddly, rather than show that Muhammad is prophesied in the Torah and the Gospel, you actually said that you are not aware of anything in the Torah which predicts the person and work of the Messiah. Are you serious? The Jews found an incredible number of passages that talked about the Messiah before He came.
Not only are there an incredible number of types and foreshadowings of the coming Messiah in the lives of the patriarchs in the book of Genesis (and if you want some examples I would be happy to give them), and a whole foreward pointing ceremonial/sacrificial system which sets forth the way of salvation and how one may approach unto God, as found in Exodus through Numbers, but there are numerous direct predictions in the Torah (from Genesis 3:15 to Deuteronomy 18).
By the way, least you miss it, the direct quote you mentioned from Jesus that His coming is prophesied all throughout the OT comes from the Gospel of Luke. Why pretend that it is only John's Gospel that you have real problems with, and why pretend that a refutation that Jesus was a prophet of Islam is solely restricted to the need to find direct claims to deity? Jesus contradicts Islam in countless ways.
As for whether John's Gospel had an agenda, I readily grant it. John was commissioned by the Lord Jesus Christ and was inspired by His Spirit to complete the fourfold Gospel. Each Gospel writer wrote with a purpose. In fact, thesis statements can be found in Mark and Luke as well. Why does this rule out the former (i.e. John’s Gospel) and not the latter (i.e. the Gospels of Mark and Luke)? And are you willing to reject the Qur'an if it has a clear agenda, a message that it is trying to communicate? I think not.
Btw, I am the infamous Charles Martel. :)
just a quick note on johns gospel and its unreliability. Luke mentions in acts 1.1 that he wrote everything jesus did and taught. The synoptic Gospels are more or less in agreement, but the funny thing is none of them mention the great "I am" statements that christians grab upon to somehow prove the deity of jesus.
This proves that many of the stuff in johns gospel is just made up and most probably a sort of rebuttal against the gospel of thomas.
Maratsafin,
First, if Luke's words do contradict John's, that doesn't prove that John is wrong and Luke is right. You are simply assuming your own position here and arriving at the conclusion that suits you.
Second, Luke does not contradict John. Luke says that he is telling the story of all that Jesus did from beginning to end, but does not thereby mean to suggest that he has been exhaustive to the point of telling us everything Jesus had to eat everyday or how many times Peter's heart beat before Jesus saved him from sinking. That's just silly. In addition, John himself says there are other things that he did not include.
Third, Jesus does say "I AM" outside of John's Gospel, as for example in Mark 6.
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
Charles Martel aka- Charles the Hammer aka Anthony Rogers aka Mr. Rogers.
I would encourage you to read what Yahya, Womanfortruth101 and others say to you more carefully because some times your responses look as if you did not carefully read what we said.
Anthony you attempted to address the issue of Jesus giving people faith where you said,
"First, you asked me where Jesus gave people faith in the NT. One verse that speaks to this is found in Matthew 11:
"All things have been handed over to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."
The actual verse reference might be helpful next time but nonetheless I can see your argument that the Son reveals the Father to people. Yet, I do not see in this passage a clear indication that Jesus is giving anyone faith.
Do you have any other passage or text that is unambiguous that clearly shows Jesus giving someone faith?
I asked you Charles
Which scholars who ARE NOT CHRISTIANS disagree with Bart Ehrman on this point Charles?
You said,
Princeton Theologian Benjamin Warfield concluded differently (see his book, The Lord of Glory). Dr. Robert Reymond in his book - Divine Messiah: The New Testament Witness
But that is not what I asked is it? Your reference and appeal to Christian scholars is moot. However, I do appreciate the book recommendation.
With the name of God continued...
Anthony/Charles you said,
"If the Gospel writers made up that Jesus was God, then they could just as easily make up sayings of Jesus to the effect that He is God."
This is a very good point! That is why I do not believe that "John" or whomever wrote it was proving that Jesus was Father divine, but was rather Son divine.
This should give Muslims pause, but it should also give conservative Christians pause as well.
I think allot of people miss the point that making Christ Jesus into God was a gradual process that started off making him the Son of God than eventually God the Son.
Notice that if we were to use the Gospel of Mark alone the idea that Christ Jesus is the Son of God is a very poor case in this Gospel.
However, once we get to the Gospel of John well as I quoted above it was written with an expressed agenda in mind.
Charles/Anthony you said,
"aside from revealing your ignorance of the Bible (there are 27 NT books)"
I'm sorry but I wish not to partake in the debate among Christians concerning the canon of the "New Tetament". There is still dispute about five books rather you like it or not.
Not only that but since your a member of the reformation fan club you would do well to read some of the aspersions that Martin Luther cast upon some of those five books as well...
continued from above,
Charles/Anthony you said,
"That means not only that we have to be able to find Muhammad mentioned in the Scriptures, but it means that they have to be reliable enough to trust that these (alleged) predictions about Muhammad are what they actually wrote and intended."
There are two problems with this train of thought.
1) Muhammed (saw) does not have to be Mentioned in black and white. This is why I gave you the example of what Jesus is reported to have said in Luke 24:44 to give you a model for comparison.
To see if you would allow for consistency.
However, you said about the Messiah
"Are you serious? THE JEWS FOUND an incredible number of passages that talked about the Messiah before He came."
This should be taken with a pinch of salt considering that www.jewsforjudaism.org or those at http://www.messiahtruth.com/response.html they both seem to take issue with Christi logical interpretations of their sacred scriptures.
They also do not appreciate Christians superimposing meaning into their sacred writ.
continued...
continued above.
Charles/Anthony you said,
"Not only are there an incredible number of types and FORESHADOWING of the coming Messiah in the lives of the patriarchs in the book of Genesis"
I think you meant to say foreshadowing with out the s but let's take a look at that interesting words you brought up.
1)prefiguration: the act of providing VAGUE advance indications; representing beforehand
2)Foreshadowing is a literary technique used by many different authors to provide CLUES for the reader to be able to predict what might occur later on in the story. ...
3)A literary device in which an author drops SUBTLE HINTS about plot developments to come later in the story
adumbrate is also seen as a word that describes foreshadowing and this word also means
1. To give a sketchy outline of.
2. To prefigure indistinctly; foreshadow.
3. To disclose partially or guardedly.
4. To overshadow; shadow or obscure.
You have more than proven that this was the case Anthony/Charles the Hammer and to argue against it would be fruitless and would not help to advance the dialog.
But you also said,
"but there are numerous DIRECT predictions in the Torah (from Genesis 3:15 to Deuteronomy 18)."
Now I'm sorry but just looking at Genesis 3:15 I see no mention of Jesus I just see Christian imagination at work.
"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise Him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15).
Who is the 'her seed and your seed'?
Anthony/Charles you may also wish to see what the Jews who refute Christians have to say about that here:
http://www.messiahtruth.com/gen315.html
It may help enrich you.
Charles/Anthony you said,
"Jesus contradicts Islam in countless ways."
Actually moving beyond the hyperbole of your statement above our concern Anthony is that you contradict Jesus in 'countless' ways.
continued..
continued from above.
Anthony/Charles you said,
"As for whether John's Gospel had an agenda, I readily grant it."
Thank you! This is charitable on your behalf. Of course as you point out we will differ on the motive or agenda as you also continue to say,
"John was commissioned by the Lord Jesus Christ and was inspired by His Spirit to complete the fourfold Gospel."
"And are you willing to reject the Qur'an if it has a clear agenda, a message that it is trying to communicate? I think not."
Fair enough. I can't disagree with your reasoning here.
Any way hope all is well in Nevada
Thanks Anthony. I knew something was off.
Yahya
Contrary to what you may believe many christians recognise me as somebody who tries to be fair and DO confide in me or ask favours from me
I do not believe anything about you, contrary to how you may categorize me. I only know you lied to me directly,(when you told me the article AL and the word HAQQ is used as a title for Muhammad in the Quran), and that you secretly retracted your mistaken article which you did not even bother to check the Arabic for. And by the Bible verses i quote you i think tis a little obvious as to "what" I am.
hello anthony, you said that jesus made one of the I AM statments in mark 6 can you pleae point out were because I cannot find it in the KJV. Also my point isnt about contradictions ( although they do have many) . Luke says he wrote down everything jesus did and taught, lets just assume he didnt mean everything single word he uttered but for him not to write down any of the lengthy discourses jesus has in johns gospel makes the gospel highly suspect. Like i said most of it is made up for the sake of theology and doctrine and probably written as a rebuttal against the gospel of thomas.
anonymousing
Please stop making stuff up
I NEVER claimed Muhammed is described in the Quran as al Haqq.
So please stop lying.
Yahya,
You said on July 9:
the title al Haq is not solely used for the Quran...it is used for the Prophet Muhammed and anything of truth
That’s a lie. Nowhere is the article AL used with HAQQ for Muhammad, and last time I checked it was a divine name of Allah, and the Quran was the divine book of the Muslims. As to the Hadith translation you provided it cannot be trused as you cannot even figure out the meaning of ‘assa from the Qur’an.
Also your follower IslamicReplies lied to me about the AL HAQQ issue.
There was also more evidence where you say that AL HAQQ is used for Muhammad in the Quran but you deleted it all, it was on the same thread you got rid off!
@anonymousing
This is one of the reasons why I dislike the internet...people make unsubstantiated claims
I have not deleted anything which you are referring to
I would not say something about the Quran in such a manner and not give a reference
Please stop with your slander
I have said one of the names of the prophet is al haqq and in the reference section there is a link to his names and al haqq is included in the list...that is all I said in that regard
Stop making stuff up
As for islamicreplies...I have no control over hwat he said nor do I even know hwat he said
again...I ask you to be fair...stop making unfounded claims and stop holding me responsible for comments by islamicreplies
PS...I noted your dishonourable style of commenting on my latest video
Would Shamoun/Wood/CP allow you to comment? No
I still do...think about it
maratsafin,
Jesus "I Am" statement is found in Mark 6. Here is the Greek text:
50παντες γαρ αυτον ειδον και εταραχθησαν ο δε ευθυς ελαλησεν μετ αυτων και λεγει αυτοις θαρσειτε εγω ειμι μη φοβεισθε
That John's Gospel has a thesis is granted on all hands. So do the other Gospel's. Repeating this observation is to insist upon something that is not at issue.
When you move from the observation that John's Gospel has a thesis to the conclusion that it is therefore unreliable, you have utterly jumped over any argument that would justify or warrant such a conclusion. Saying it has a thesis doesn't do it.
As for the inclusion in John's Gospel of long discourses not found in the others...once again, you have not established that Luke's Gospel (or that of Matthew and Mark) were intended to be understood as telling us everything Jesus said in the course of his three year ministry (or in the last days before His crucifixion, which is what John focuses on).
Also, even if we assume that the apostle John wrote his account to counter "the Gospel of Thomas", that doesn't tell us that John is to be rejected in favor of such a Gospel. Why believe "the Gospel of Thomas" over the canonical Gospel of John?
Yahya said: "I have not deleted anything which you [Anonymousing] are referring to"
Yahya, since Anonymousing also referred to you doctoring your "refutation" of Jochen's article so no one would know about your unscholarly blunder (to which you added deception by changing it w/o alerting people to the change), are you officially denying that you did this?
TGV, I will get to your posts later. I'm a little busy right now and can't respond to all of you. I should have some time on Saturday.
I spoke to Sam Shamoun and here is his response to Yahya:
"Being a good Muslim Yahya is up to his old, lying, deceptive ways again. This is to be expected from someone who actually believes Muhammad was an example to imitate and that Allah is actually god. My appeal to Jibreelk and Yahya wasn't because I believe 'deep down in my heart' that Muslim dawagandists who try to sincerely follow the Quran are good people who do not insult others. That is a lie from hell. I have provided documentation and will do so again that Allah, Muhammad, and his band of thugs had no qualms about insulting and ridiculing people and their beliefs. So why would other Muhammadans who sincerely follow Muhammad be any different or better? The fact is that Muslims like Yahya are inconsistent, deceptive thugs who do not practice what they preach since this is the kind of individuals Islam creates. Thankfully, most Muslims do not follow the Quran so most of them are decent human beings. Let me repeat, the reason why they are decent human beings IS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT KNOW OR FOLLOW THE TEACHINGS OF ISLAM since if they did they would be like Yahya and Jibreel, lying, deceptive thugs who condemn others for the very things they are guilty of."
"Now the reason why I appealed to them was to provide further documentation of their hypocrisy and lies since instead of condemning these Muslim thugs who come in and blaspheme the God of the Bible or harass Christians, both Yahya and Jibreelk will find any excuse to justify their behavior since they are no better than them and know that this is the kind of persons Islam produces. And yet they whine and complain when Christians such as myself give them a dose of their own medicine. Muslim dawagandists like Jibreelk and Yahya are repulsive to say the least."
"So now that I have set the record straight and further exposed that Yahya is a compulsive liar will he now be honest and man enough to not only correct his post but actually debate me on his claims and ‘replies’ to our arguments? Will his fellow Muslim taqiyyist Jibreelk be man enough to step up to the plate and defend his false prophet? Or will these two Muslim thugs continue to make excuses and run away? I think we all know the answers."
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
Charles Martel/Anthony Rogers initially said,
"Third, Jesus does say "I AM" outside of John's Gospel, as for example in Mark 6."
However, when he gives the actual reference in Mark 6:50 there is nothing amazing about it.
A Maratsafin stated that he could not find it in the KJV translation.
So Charles/Anthony brings us the Greek text.
But what would that prove?
Because we have a blind man using the I AM statement here.
John 9:9 "9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I AM HE.
Do you not see whom this man is claiming to be?
Also if you anyone has a red letter Bible Exodus 3:14 is not in red! This is a very minor point. However, it is signifigant because all the words of Jesus are supposed to be in red. Yet Exodus 3:14 is not in red.
Again a minor point but noteworthy for discussions sake.
Atta boy, TGV, way to show your lack of regard for context and consistency.
First of all, your lack of consistency. This discussion has seen you and other Muslims charge John's Gospel with innovation on the original teachings found in the synoptic Gospels. The particular example you guys brought forward was the fact that John's Gospel teaches that Jesus is God, from His very own lips no less, an admission that shows Muslims are now backtracking on their claim that Jesus never declared Himself to be God in the Gospels, a not so insignificant admission. In particular you guys have argued that John's Gospel is unreliable because it features Jesus invoking the divine name, I AM, in application to Himself, and this was said to be lacking in the synoptics.
When I pointed out that Jesus does declare Himself to be the great I AM in the Gospel of Mark, and here I only gave one example but could have given others (e.g. Mark 14:62), you then turned around and appealed to the "unreliable" Gospel of John in a futile attempt to refute this point.
To state the obvious, if you are going to appeal to John's Gospel to argue that this statement is unremarkable in itself, a fact that assumes the story is reliable, then of course I may hold your feet to the fire and point out just how Christ's absolute I AM declarations in John's Gospel stand apart from the words of the blind man in John 9. If you reply that John's Gospel is unreliable, then your appeal to John 9 over against passages like Mark 6:50 and 14:62 falls to the ground.
And now for your disregard of context. When it comes to Mark 6:50, you embarassingly said there is nothing remarkable about what is going on here. To the contrary. In context the disciples are out to sea without Jesus. A furious storm sets in upon them. Then Jesus is seen walking to them on the water, a sight that only adds to their terror (since they didn't know who or what it was that they saw). At that point, Jesus tells them to be at peace, commands the winds and the waves to cease, and declares "I AM". (John's Gospel notes that when Jesus stepped on the boat, they immediately reached the other side). At this the disciples worshipped Him. This is the context of the passage. This is the context of the remarks uttered by Christ which provoked you to reply, "there's nothing amazing about it." Might I suggest that you try looking at it from the apostles standpoint, namely on your knees in worship? Looked at from this posture, the passage should take on a whole new significance for you. (That you could judge this account to be unremarkable makes your reference to the blind man all the more ironic. Perhaps if you hit your knees and cry out to Jesus, then He will give you eyes to "see" as well.)
Your remark about the words of God in the Old Testament not being in red letters is less than a "minor point", as you called it. There is no point to this. The Hebrew and Greek manuscripts were not written in colored ink. They did not make this distinction in any other way either.
The following articles should help you see things more clearly:
An I Am saying in the earliest Gospel.
An I AM statement in Matthew's Gospel
The Lord Jesus - The Maker and Ruler of Creation
Yahya,
Your silence on my remarks made several times now on this and other posts is truly deafening. Aren't you embarassed by your willful (and PROVEN) deception by now?
Anthony
Please cease with your baseless claims.
Anonymousing was speaking about the "al haqq" issue. I answered him...so please stop interjecting your own material into his words.
As for the other article (salvation) I did make alterations to the article...I have never denied making alterations to my article on salvation
Thus your claim of deception is baseless.
Recently one of your crew had the decency to email me an apology as he falsely accused me of lying...food for thought
PS...I want to add something to the discussion in this comment section on John...God Willing I will do it tonight or tomorrow
Peace
Yahya,
Since I saved your original post knowing that you would try to cover your tracks in the snow, calling my accusation "baseless" only further proves your willingness to deceieve. What will you say when I post it?
When you admit to nothing more than "altering" your original article, something you don't acknowledge in the article itself, you are employing weasel words. What really happened is you made a blunder that exposed your lack of scholarship and your faultering integrity, two qualities you are constantly petitioning people to see in you.
To state the facts more fully: you pretended to have discovered that the Arabic word 'assa, which you said is used in Surah 48:2, can actually mean certainty. However, the facts were shown to be otherwise: not only did you get your information here from Zawadi, including the Arabic sources you cited to appear learned; but the word that you, following Zawadi, said can mean certainty rather than possibility, i.e. "may", is NOT found in the verse at all.
To make matters worse, this was the climactic point in Jochen's article, which shows that you not only didn't check the Qur'an, but you didn't even fully or carefully read the article you pretended to be refuting.
These are the facts that you need to come clean about. You should have written a post apologizing to Jochen and to your Muslim fans. Instead, as usual, you deceptively tried to mislead everyone by covering your tracks in the snow. You are a credit to your name.
Anthony..
I did not pretend to discover assa meaning certainty...stop lying
In the heading to that particulr section I made it specifically clear I was analysing theconvo between Zawadi and Katz in order to highlight Katz desperate style
Please stop making stuff up
Looks like you are upset about the attention your pal Sam Shamoun is getting on YT...a new three part video is out on YT by Beholder
PS...I noticed your new article on Shamoun's site...God Willing somebody will respond to it soon
Yahya,
First, since I know you won't be responding to my article, you tell whoever it is that I am looking forward to their attempt.
Second, since you won't stop lying, here is exactly what you ORIGINALLY wrote:
---Quote---
"For the benefit of the reader they have been arguing over S48:12 in order to ascertain whether Muhammed had salvation assured or not.
Lo! We have given thee (O Muhammad) a signal victory, That Allah MAY forgive thee of thy sin that which is past and that which is to come, and MAY perfect His favour unto thee, and MAY guide thee on a right path, S. 48:1-2 Pickthall
As you can imagine Shamoun and those following his methodology such as Katz have been working the “May” angle in an attempt to convince us Muhammad’s salvation was uncertain.
This despite dictionary evidence showing the word for “may” (assa) has dual meaning; it can either denote certainty or probability:
The Arabic word translated as "may" isعسى ('assa). Ibn Mandhur in his famous Lisaan al-Arab dictionary says that the word 'assa could linguistically either indicate probability or certainty. (Ibn Manzur, Lisaan Al Arab, Volume 15, page 54; under the word عسا)"
---End Quote---
So, in point of fact, sir, you are a bold faced liar.
P.S. I have little idea what is happening on YT. As you can see from my own page I am not particularly active in that arena, and I wouldn't trust your blog post on this for anything. You are a proven liar who refuses to repent in the face of clear evidence (see the above for an example).
By the way, to preempt you from deleting this page and the comments, I have saved it also. This is all going to make a great post.
Anthony
Stop misdirecting
Did you bother to read what I wrote prior to it...I made sure everybody knew I was analysing the convo between Zawadi and Katz
Just like I'm doing between Jibreelk and Shamoun
So please stop your silly spin already
It is sad that you have resorted to such a dubiour method...sad indeed.
I guess the way you try to defend Sam Shamoun iss by attacking the bloke who is doing the "christian" thing in rebuking Shamoun
As for your article...you may be pleasantly surprised...I remember on the AM blog you would always have a go at me for not responding, every once in a while...I do :)
Again, Anthony you fail to prove anything other than your desperation
Here is Beholder's first video of the three:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpgsetg63lI&feature=channel
Perhaps you will respond in place of Sam
I didn't say you weren't analyzing their dialogue. The problem is that your statement shows you didn't analyze it very well.
Everyone can read the quote I provded above and see that YOU were actually trying to claim that the word 'assa is found in Surah 48:2. The words are your own, not a quotation from Zawadi. Here is what YOU said again:
---Quote---
As you can imagine Shamoun and those following his methodology such as Katz have been working the “May” angle in an attempt to convince us Muhammad’s salvation was uncertain.
This despite dictionary evidence showing the word for “may” (assa) has dual meaning; it can either denote certainty or probability:
---End Quote---
So you can call this spin all you want, but it shows quite clealy that you don't know what the word "spin" means (Actually, it shows that you are just as willing to spin the meaning of the word "spin" as you are to lie about the issue before us). In fact, all of this goes hand in hand with your farfetched claim that a word can mean one thing and what is virtually its opposite: i.e. "possibility" and "certainty". This is linguistic confusion to the hilt.
Face it: You have been caught red-handed. The only thing left for me to do on this is write up a post exposing it to the world since you won't repent. You've had your chance.
As for you trying to respond to my article, I would be only toooooo thrilled. In fact, here is my prediction: after I respond to you, you will peter out and will not have any reply. That is your modus operandi.
Let me know when your response is posted. Try not to wear yourself out so you still have something left when I reply.
Anthony...waste your time writing whatever you want
The fact remains you are onto a loser again
READ the stuff prior to it and you will realise the context
Here are a few to show you are being unjust:
NOTE: The subsequent passage related to "may" is irrelevant as the word "assa" does not appear in S48:2. However it serves to highlight Katz willingness to resort to shoddy scholarship in an attempt to fly in the face of authority
We have already seen Muhammad is going to Paradise and therefore is guaranteed Paradise. But let us cut through some of the now obsolete points Katz has been making in order to get a flavour of his shoddy approach to matters related to faith
Katz goes on to facetiously attack a spelling error on the part of Zawadi, ever heard of typographical errors or genuine errors Katz?
In a response to Bassam Zawadi, Jochen Katz begins with:
(this clearly sets the tone...ie I am going to analyze the dialogue between the two)
So anthony...don't waste my time
As for responding to you...there is never any certainty
Yahya,
How desperate and even more deceptive.
The quotes you just supplied come from your "doctored" version. I was citing from your original article which I have saved. You know you are lying. Throw in the towel.
As for a response to my article, I know it is far from certain that you will follow through. But I am ready when (and IF) you are.
Again...you prove nothing
HOW am I lying? I would really love to know whta is going through your mind? I promise you...if you can explain this allegation of dishonesty to me and I consider it fair I will make a blog post rebuking myself. BUT, I REALLY cannot see what you are getting at...please explain it and I will look into it
How can you doctor your OWN article?
Last time I checked the word was ammend.
Anthony...ok, you are "ready" for a response...you sound like Sam shamoun :)
any way...my food is getting cold...I'm off...PLEASE explain what you are getting at...I really don't like being called a liar...especially whn I have no clue where and when I supposedly lied
Peace and LOVE...Anthony, don't forget the LOVE...you seem to be very angry towards me of late. Don't allow the negativity related to your friends on this blog influence you in an "unchrist"-like fashion
With that I leave you for now
Again...you prove nothing
I proved that you deceptively covered up your error, and I have proved that you have lied several times now to cover up your original deception.
HOW am I lying? I would really love to know whta is going through your mind? I promise you...if you can explain this allegation of dishonesty to me and I consider it fair I will make a blog post rebuking myself. BUT, I REALLY cannot see what you are getting at...please explain it and I will look into it
But judge, I know they caught me in the act of robbing that bank. But if you can explain this allegation I will look into it. If I determine that I actually did commit a crime, then I will sentence myself to a long time in prison.
How can you doctor your OWN article?
Last time I checked the word was ammend.
Last time I checked, the word "ammend", which is just another weasel word without the accompanying explanation that you made a huge mistake and are now trying to correct it, does not even appear in your new version.
Anthony...ok, you are "ready" for a response...you sound like Sam shamoun :)
You said you are going to "respond" to me. You sound like yourself here. You also said you might not respond. Again you sound like yourself. I think I am going to start calling you Sic et Non John.
any way...my food is getting cold...I'm off...PLEASE explain what you are getting at...I really don't like being called a liar...
And I don't like being lied to.
Peace and LOVE...Anthony, don't forget the LOVE...you seem to be very angry towards me of late...
Like you, I don't like people lying to me and others and pretending that I am the one who is actually "spinning" things and making "baseless" accusations.
I have proven who the liar is here. Repent or live with your choice without complaining.
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
Charles Martel/Anthony Rogers.
Again I'm going to ask you to read things more carefully. It serves you no purpose not to do so.
You said,
This discussion has seen YOU and other Muslims charge John's Gospel with INNOVATION ON THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS found in the synoptic Gospels.
You'll find I did nothing of the kind. In fact if you scroll up we were in agreement about what was the purpose of John's Gospel. I even conceded the point that this does not necessarily mean that whom ever wrote the Gospel was 'up to no good'.
You said, "And are you willing to reject the Qur'an if it has a clear agenda, a message that it is trying to communicate? I think not."
Because you brought to my attention a very excellent counter point if this was to be my position.
However, Charles Martel/Anthony Rogers I am afraid it is you and your position that will be all the more embarrassed from this and I'll proceed to elaborate why.
Maratsafin initially said, "The synoptic Gospels are more or less in agreement, but the funny thing is none of them mention the great "I am" statements that christians grab upon to somehow PROVE THE DEITY OF JESUS."
Anthony/Charles you responded by saying,
"Third, Jesus does say "I AM" outside of John's Gospel, as for example in Mark 6."
I found two things curious about this.
1) your lack of specific reference and
2)after you give the reference the fact that you did not indicate translation used.
continued..
continued from above.
Anthony you said, "And now for your disregard of context. When it comes to Mark 6:50, you embarassingly said there is nothing remarkable about what is going on here."
Than you said, "At that point, Jesus tells them to be at peace, commands the winds and the waves to cease, and declares "I AM". (John's Gospel notes that when Jesus stepped on the boat, they immediately reached the other side). At this the disciples worshipped Him."
Two points.
1) Could you please give us the translation that you are using to come up with Mark 6:50 Jesus saying, "I AM"?
Please note I am not disputing the Greek text. Simply want to know which translation you think helps render the Greek text in this situation more accurately.
2) Could you please point out to me the translation where it says, "At this the disciples worshipped Him"?
Let me use the NKJV seems to be conservative and see what we come up with.
50 for they all saw Him and were troubled. But immediately He talked with them and said to them, “Be of good cheer! It is I; do not be afraid.” 51 Then He went up into the boat to them, and the wind ceased. And they were greatly amazed in themselves beyond measure, and marveled. 52 For they had not understood about the loaves, because their heart was hardened.
Many Touch Him and Are Made Well
53 When they had crossed over, they came to the land of Gennesaret and anchored there. 54 And when they came out of the boat, immediately the people recognized Him, 55 ran through that whole surrounding region, and began to carry about on beds those who were sick to wherever they heard He was. 56 Wherever He entered, into villages, cities, or the country, they laid the sick in the marketplaces, and begged Him that they might just touch the hem of His garment. And as many as touched Him were made well.
Where did you get "I AM" and 'disciples worshiped him' from?
continued from above.
Anthony you said, "And now for your disregard of context. When it comes to Mark 6:50, you embarassingly said there is nothing remarkable about what is going on here."
Than you said, "At that point, Jesus tells them to be at peace, commands the winds and the waves to cease, and declares "I AM". (John's Gospel notes that when Jesus stepped on the boat, they immediately reached the other side). At this the disciples worshipped Him."
Two points.
1) Could you please give us the translation that you are using to come up with Mark 6:50 Jesus saying, "I AM"?
Please note I am not disputing the Greek text. Simply want to know which translation you think helps render the Greek text in this situation more accurately.
2) Could you please point out to me the translation where it says, "At this the disciples worshipped Him"?
Let me use the NKJV seems to be conservative and see what we come up with.
50 for they all saw Him and were troubled. But immediately He talked with them and said to them, “Be of good cheer! It is I; do not be afraid.” 51 Then He went up into the boat to them, and the wind ceased. And they were greatly amazed in themselves beyond measure, and marveled. 52 For they had not understood about the loaves, because their heart was hardened.
Many Touch Him and Are Made Well
53 When they had crossed over, they came to the land of Gennesaret and anchored there. 54 And when they came out of the boat, immediately the people recognized Him, 55 ran through that whole surrounding region, and began to carry about on beds those who were sick to wherever they heard He was. 56 Wherever He entered, into villages, cities, or the country, they laid the sick in the marketplaces, and begged Him that they might just touch the hem of His garment. And as many as touched Him were made well.
Where did you get "I AM" and 'disciples worshiped him' from?
continued from above.
Next...let's look at the Mark 14:60-62 passages still using the NKJV
60 And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 61 But He kept silent and answered nothing.
Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”
62 Jesus said, “I am. And YOU will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
Notice nothing amazing happens here either? No is worshiping Jesus or declaring him to be God?
In fact this passage raises an eyebrow because the High Priest DID NOT see Jesus sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven. So more embarrassment perhaps?
My appeal to John 9:9 is very consistent with this whole conversation.
9 Some said, “This is he.” Others said, “He is like him.”[a]
He said, “I am he.”
continued...
continued...
Anthony you said, "(That you could judge this account to be unremarkable makes your reference to the blind man all the more ironic. Perhaps if you hit your knees and cry out to Jesus, then He will give you eyes to "see" as well.)"
Ironic? Ironic indeed.
Let's see what happens after Jesus gives SIGHT seeing that you like to use this example that I am in spiritual darkness.
John 9:17 17 They said to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him because He opened your eyes?”
He said, “He is a prophet.”
So it looks like the man that Jesus made to see and myself are on the same page brother!
Notice the man did not say, Well Jesus is God, Well, he's the I AM.
Nope! Someone you say was touched, by Jesus. That man said he was a prophet.
So it looks like your irony has turned back upon you.
Sorry TGV,
The comments on each blog post, after a few days turn to approve only due to the settings of the blog
@Anthony...I asked for an explanation not a reiteration
Thanks
TGV,
That's funny, you say I did not read what you wrote very well, and then you turn around and say I am going to be embarassed on the very point you say you don't hold.
I recognized your initial concession after the problem with that line of thinking was pointed out to you, but your turnabout in your last posts in an effort to "embarass" me shows that you are still somewhat attached to the idea that John's Gospel represents an innovation over the teaching of the Synoptics.
I am going to skip over some things for the sake of brevity, but hopefully I don't miss anything important.
First, the I AM declarations found in Mark's Gospel are based on the Greek text. That's why no particular translation was given. The Greek text is not a translation.
Second, the statement that the disciples worshipped Him on this occasion is found in the parallel passage in Matthew, another Synoptic Gospel that includes this "I AM" declaration made by the Lord Jesus.
As for the blind man issue, you didn't read the rest of the story. Anyone who truly believes that Jesus, the real Jesus, is a prophet is forced by this very fact to recognize that He is also more than that:
35Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and when he found him, he said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?"
36"Who is he, sir?" the man asked. "Tell me so that I may believe in him."
37Jesus said, "You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you."
38Then the man said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him.
39Jesus said, "For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind."
40Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, "What? Are we blind too?"
41Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.
Pretty poignant, wouldn't you say?
-----
I will let you have the last word on this discussion. Time is important these days.
Hi Grand,
I dont think Anthony will want to waste anymore of his precious time answering something he already answered so I will give it a shot.
You said: 1) Could you please give us the translation that you are using to come up with Mark 6:50 Jesus saying, "I AM"?
SURE: And in the fourth watch of the night Jeshu came to them walking upon the waters, (as though) he willed to pass by them; but they beheld him walking upon the waters, and thought it was a spectre, and they cried out; for all saw him and were afraid. But he immediately spoke to them and said to them, Take heart, I am, fear not. And he ascended to them into the ship, and the wind was still: and they wondered greatly, and were astonished among themselves. For they understood not from that bread, because their heart was gross. Mar 6:48-52 Etheridge Peshitta (which is one of the MOST literal)
And Anthony DID give you a reference. He even gave you the Greek EGO EIMI.
As for disciples WORSHIPPING Him and other contexts - you seem to have a problem comprehending context when you quote these passages out of context. For example try adding verses 63 and 64to Mark 14 and it might make more sense.
The other points you made are really imaginative but time is precious.
Besides about Ehrman, so how can you guys be such hypocrites and use his scholarship against the Bible when you full well do not use the same liberal scholarship as a standard for the Quran? Just wondering. (And when I did hear Ehrman mention the Quran in one of his debates, he shrugged it off and laughed about it! maybe his HISTORICAL standards are just too high to apply to the Quran?)
With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.
Anthony I still have no problem with the complete passage of John chapter 9. My only point was to show that other's beside Jesus used the phrase "I AM" and they obviously were not God because of that statement.
I also find nothing problematic in the whole chapter of 9 in accord with my theology as a Muslim.
Jesus is the Son of Man (human being). Your point?
So I still think you have egg on your face over this one. You wanted to use it to stress a point that I was in spiritual darkness, but nothing in this passage indicates that the blind man made to see saw Jesus as anything other than 'a human being'(son of man) and a Prophet.
Pretty poignant, wouldn't you say?
With the name of God, continued...
Anonymously...
50 ܟ݁ܽܠܗܽܘܢ ܓ݁ܶܝܪ ܚܙܰܐܘܽܗ݈ܝ ܘܰܕ݂ܚܶܠܘ ܘܒ݂ܰܪ ܫܳܥܬ݂ܶܗ ܡܰܠܶܠ ܥܰܡܗܽܘܢ ܘܶܐܡܰܪ ܠܗܽܘܢ ܐܶܬ݂ܠܰܒ݈݁ܒ݂ܘ ܐܶܢܳܐ ܐ݈ܢܳܐ ܠܳܐ ܬ݁ܶܕ݂ܚܠܽܘܢ܂
"For they all saw him and were frightened. And immediately he spoke of them, saying, Have courage, it is I,do not be afraid" (Lamsa Translation of the Aramaic).
I'm curious based upon the Aramaic text above why would you prefer Etheridge translation over Lamsa.
Btw I was never disputing that the passage in Greek says EGO EIMI. I just found it note worthy that no translation gave it as such.
However you have given an obscure translation that not to many people know of. So in response I am curious why you feel it is more appropriate than Lamsa's (if you feel that way)
continued..
But Jeshu was silent, and answered him nothing. And again the chief of the priests demanded, and said, Art thou the Meshicha, the Son of the Blessed?* And he, Jeshu, said to him, I am: and you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming upon the clouds of heaven. Then the chief of the priests tore his robe, and said, Why now seek we witnesses ? Behold, from his own lips you have heard the blasphemy: how is it seen by you ? And they all judged that he was guilty of death. And some began to spit on his person, and they struck him on his face, and did buffet him, saying, Prophesy ! and the servitors struck him upon his cheeks.
Mark 14:63-63
Etheridge Peshitta (which is one of the MOST literal)
So what is your point Anonymously?
Grand,
So what is your point Anonymously?
My point was to answer your question where you say:
Could you please give us the translation that you are using to come up with Mark 6:50 Jesus saying, "I AM"?
So, I did so since you asked politely. And it does not matter which translation you use, the literal is the Greek EGO EIMI which translates I AM.
However you have given an obscure translation that not to many people know of.
Etheridge translation is NOT some "obscure translation that not to many people know of" by a long shot. It is a WIDELY known translation. It just seems obscure to you as you dont know much about words which are theopneustos.
Peace and grace.
isnt "jochenkatzz" shamouns partner from AI??
before abraham ego eimi
wow did i just claim divinity? amazing ..
and if he did claim divinity as implied by these cross worshipers then why didn't he use the same verbatim as "yhwh" in Ex. 3:14??? which was "היה hayah"
the gospellers recorded some of his alleged Aramaic sayings so no excuses
@anonympous...yes :(
Yahya,
I hate to think that you are knowingly lying again, but I am sure you know differently than what you just told anonymous.
The YT jochenkatzz is not the real Jochen.
NO anonymous, you did NOT just claim divinity, since before Abraham, you WERE NOT, but Jesus was :)
AND NO IT IS NOT THE CHRISTIAN JOCHEN KATZZ, A COLLEGUE OF SAM AND WRITER FOR AI. I EVEN CONTACTED THEM OVER THIS SINCE YAHYA DOES NOT INCLUDE THIS PARTICULAR AND VERY CRUCIAL INFO IN HIS DECEPTIVE ARTICLE.
AND LOOKIE LOOKIE!!! YAHYA ANSWERED WITH A SIMPLE "YES" - MORE LIES AND DECEPTION YAHYA??
A MUSLIM JOKER MADE UP A YOUTUBE NAME "jochenkatzz" AND SAID THOSE UNGODLY THINGS ABOUT SAM AND HIS FAMILY.
JUST LIKE A MUSLIM CLOWN SAID HE WAS CHRISTIAN AND THEN THREATENED NABEEL WITH DEATH BEFORE HIS "MIRACULOUS" INTERNET CONVERSION TO ISLAM.
OR THE HUNDREDS OF MUSLIM CLOWNS RUNNING AROUND THE INTERNET PRETENDING TO BE CHRISTIANS, AGNOSTICS AND ATHEISTS.
UNFORTUNATELY, I AM STARTING TO LEARN IT IS COMMON FOR MUSLIMS TO MAKE UP FALSE IDENTITIES AND THREATEN OR MANIPULATE PEOPLE USING EMPATHY NOT ONLY ONLY ONLINE, BUT IN PERSON! I THINK TIS THAT TAQQQQIAAAAA!!!!
Now to wait and see if Yahya approves :)
Anthony...im talking about the REAL JOCHENKATZ...
anon asked me if jochen was the partner of samshamoun...i said yes.
end of story
As for the troll who is on YT...IT IS OBVIOUS the guy abusing sam's mom is NOT JOCHEN FROM AI
think about it anthony...you really are desperate to attack me...would Jesus behave in such a way?
no...think about it
the same applies to anonymousing
Yahya,
The reason you are a deceiver is not b/c anyone wants to attack you. It is b/c you lie a lot.
Take the incident before us: it is obvious anon was asking about "jochenkatzz" (not Jochen Katz) whom you mention in this blog post. Your answer to HIS question implies that it is the very same Jochen from AI. This was deceptive.
But now that you've made the distinction since your arm was twisted, we can conclude this episode and wait for your next caper.
Anthony...grow up please
Your desperation leads you to extremely immature thought patterns
In MY POST..I intimate the Jochenkatz on YT is an atheist...there is NO claim r hint of him being Sam's partner.
Think about it...it is clear to anybody who is familiar with the net there are trolls who act in this way. Geroge Galloway has a similar troll who assumes George's name. Nobody believes that troll is the real George Galloway
It does not take a rocket scientist to realise this Jochenkatz on YT is not Sam shamoun's friend and partner due to the things which were said.
As simple as that.
So nobody in their right mind will claim I was saying this troll on YT is Sam's partner and friend.
Please take a logic class or two.
Would Jesus behave in your shoddy way?
No...if you want to be taken seriously, Anthony, please start behaving in a mature manner and a manner which reflects mature reasoning
I'm sick of seeing christians acting in a most unchrist like manner.
I'm done wasting my time here.
WWJD???
Think about it...
I've been saying for a long while now that you are wasting your time (and everyone else's). Now that we are on the same page, I'm going to do what Jesus would do and tell you you are a liar like your father (John 8).
Post a Comment