Jump to content

What If They Are Wrong?


Abiyoyo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Room for error on the part of the Gospels. Pertaining to Ishmael and Islam, what exactly are you wanting to know from me?

 

I'm not calling you out Justin, but you brought up something that has been on my mind and study.

 

Islam is just as Biblical based as Christianity. Ishmael is God's, same as Issac. Right?

 

The only difference is that Christianity continued on with God's 'covenant' to David, from Issac's side.

 

2 Chr 21:7

7 Howbeit the LORD would not destroy the house of David, because of the covenant that he had made with David, and as he promised to give a light to him and to his sons for ever.

(KJV)

 

2 Sam 7:12-16

12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.

13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever.

14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.

16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.

(KJV)

But God also made a covenant with Ishmael.

 

 

Gen 16:10-11

10 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude.

11 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou art with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction.

(KJV)

 

The reason I asked is because of your post below which shows what most Christians have been preaching. Jesus or Hell?

QUOTE (Justin @ Feb 26 2009, 08:34 PM) *

You cannot lump all the people who believe in a god and say they believe in the god of Israel. According to your Bible, most of these folks will burn in hell when they die because they do not accept Jesus as the savior of mankind. The Muslims just view him as a prophet and the Jews didn't think he was the son of god. So, all these folks will burn in hell for all eternity simply because god didn't make his presence known.

 

Now, some Christians also use this scripture to say Jesus is 'required', yet it calls the person a Prophet *note, its capitalized even in the KJV*. Then, the Gospels speak of Jesus as 'the way'. I'm sure there is more than what I provided, but that's the jest of it.

 

 

Deut 18:17-19

17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.

18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

(KJV)

 

But Here's the kicker. What did Jesus really say? Whether it be the church, or the writers of the NT, somebody made him superman. Right? Islam considers Him a great prophet. Is it really true that if any person that doesn't believe Jesus is God....hold on. :scratch:will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name will go to Hell?

 

Now. I know the verses in the gospels, and throughout the NT would discredit what I just presented; but that's the point. Islamic believe Christians are blasphemous, Jews don't believe Christians have the right Messiah, and Christians believe if you don't believe in Christ as heir to God, then you a going to hell.

 

My point, maybe they are wrong. Where in the OT does it say, screw the law, as Paul did said, here's your Saviour; and if you don't follow Him, you will go to Hell. Where did Jesus say, screw the law? He didn't, even going on to commend it, respect it, yet showing the Jews that the path to God is not altogether by the law. He mentioned David, and how he took the bread from the alter, seeming to try to connect 'the path' as not necessarily bound by law. So, where in the OT does it speak of the believing in God's future covenant, or face Hell?

 

Isa 49:6-13

6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

7 Thus saith the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the LORD that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.

8 Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;

9 That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places.

10 They shall not hunger nor thirst; neither shall the heat nor sun smite them: for he that hath mercy on them shall lead them, even by the springs of water shall he guide them.

11 And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways shall be exalted.

12 Behold, these shall come from far: and, lo, these from the north and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim.

13 Sing, O heavens; and be joyful, O earth; and break forth into singing, O mountains: for the LORD hath comforted his people, and will have mercy upon his afflicted.

I'm still looking into it, but from what I gather. The Messiah was a light to the God of Israel for the Gentiles, or everyone other than a Jew; God's last and everlasting covenant from David. How did Jesus turn into the 'only way'. We have unknown writings from Paul, why not anyone else. Which, I will add; could shed some light, to His light.

 

I want add this scripture from Micah, which in this new light; could very well mean what I'm suggesting.

 

Isa 2:2-9

2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

5 O house of Jacob, come ye, and let us walk in the light of the LORD.

6 Therefore thou hast forsaken thy people the house of Jacob, because they be replenished from the east, and are soothsayers like the Philistines, and they please themselves in the children of strangers.

7 Their land also is full of silver and gold, neither is there any end of their treasures; their land is also full of horses, neither is there any end of their chariots:

8 Their land also is full of idols; they worship the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers have made:

9 And the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself: therefore forgive them not.

(KJV)

 

What are your thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been awhile so I can't quite remember, but I believe there is something in the Gospels about Jesus being the only way to God. Though like all scripture that is open to interpretation.

 

Damn, I may actually have to dust my Bible off and look a few things up.

 

Edit: Ah I see that you are looking for OT precedent, disregard.

 

But yes the idea that theists may have it wrong has occurred to me. :P

 

Careful though, I started my road out of the Church by tossing out Paul too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YoYo, i think the discrepancies between the OT and the NT are due to both being seperate compilations of stories from two different times. Which explains why god in the NT was pretty much non-existant, while in the OT he was a ruthless monster on a rampage. They had become more civillized in the time the NT was written.

 

But anyway, i think Islam is just an earlier off shoot of Judism than Christianity. Islam diverged with Ishmael and Christianity broke off at Jesus, though they did make that part up themselves. Thats about all i can say on the matter, for i don't know a whole lot about the Quran or the Islamic faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well chronologically Islam came later than Christianity. 6th century CE if I remember correctly.

 

 

While we are on the subject of whether Christ was supposed to be God or not, I've always wondered what the impetus was for the proto-orthodox deification of Christ. Does anyone have an idea?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well chronologically Islam came later than Christianity. 6th century CE if I remember correctly.

While we are on the subject of whether Christ was supposed to be God or not, I've always wondered what the impetus was for the proto-orthodox deification of Christ. Does anyone have an idea?

 

In my opinion Doc, I think they were just waiting for Christ to come and set up a new kingdom as in past times. Then, here comes Jesus; all but everything they expected. There are verses where they were asking Him about war, and revolt. I think lack of that.....made them stop and re-think.People assume that because Jesus rose from the dead, He was deity. If that is the case, then so is Samuel; when Saul went to a spiritualists. As a Christian, I want to believe that Christ is true, but there is alot of skepticism around the notion of His deity.

 

Anyway, I think Paul didn't help. Ever notice, even today, the disciple's church lineage*RCC* is more ritualistic, structured, stand firm doctrine. They respected, and admired Paul's work; because He was the one pushing Christ, and His divinity. Boldly, that is to the Gentiles, quoted "converting many". Yet, I see Paul encouraging the idea of the Godhead. They wanted a God like the other Gods, sound familiar? Exodus? Molten calf?

 

As in the OP, Where in the OT did it say He was God or heir to God other than here? And if that is taken literally, God calling Him His Son, then one would have to wonder about the rest of the verse. Jesus was beat, then killed. Did Jesus 'commit iniquity'? Then, you would have to wonder about iniquity, as Samuel was the translator. Remember Saul? :grin: Of course....God....answers that ironically in the next verse :Doh: ....Oh....Boy....Houston, we have a problem. That sure sounds like Samuel thinking to himself out loud :Hmm: But, even for the critics that's just one verse that suggests deity to Christ from the OT. Are their others, saying the Christ would be deity to God? :shrug:

 

2Sam7:14,15

14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee.

 

The Ot plainly states that the Christ would be a light to all peoples. Thats it :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies for the thread hijack folks, but something for you all to consider since the thread title is What if They Are Wrong.

 

Older than both Christianity and Islam, and possibly as old if not older, is Zoroastrianism. If there has to be a dualistic nature to creation, the Zoroastrian view would be best, because their god, Ahura Mazda knows how to forgive. Even those of us who belong to other faiths or no faith at all would get into heaven just by living righteous lives, and not by some arbitrary salvation, and even those who fell short of the goal, would be punished in hell, but it would only be to purify their souls and so they can be admitted into heaven. Ahura Mazda doesn't eternally damn,but intends everyone to come to live forever in the Hall of Happiness, which would make him a much more just god than Yahweh or Allah. I'm not saying I believe this, I'm just sayin..

 

Here's a brief explanation of Zoroastrianism

 

Zoroastrian Sacred Text:

 

The Zorastrian holy book is called the Avesta. This includes the original words of their founder Zarathushtra, preserved in a series of five hymns, called the Gathas. The latter represent the basic source of the religion. The Gathas are abstract sacred poetry, directed towards the worship of the One God, understanding of righteousness and cosmic order, promotion of social justice and individual choice between good and evil. The Gathas have a general and even universal vision.

 

At some later date (most scholars say many centuries after the death of Zarathustra), the remaining parts of the Avestas were written. These deal with laws of ritual and practice, with the traditions of the faith. The Zoroastrian community is sharply divided between those who would follow mostly (or exclusively) the teachings of the original Gathas, and those who believe that the later traditions are important and equally divinely inspired.

Zoroastrian Beliefs:

 

Beliefs include:

 

* A single god Ahura Mazda who is supreme. Communication between Himself and humans is by a number of Attributes, called Amesha Spentas or Bounteous Immortals. Within the Gathas, the original Zoroastrian sacred text, these Immortals are sometimes described as concepts, and are sometimes personified.

 

* One school of thought promotes a cosmic dualism between:

o An all powerful God Ahura Mazda who is the only deity worthy of being worshipped, and

o An evil spirit of violence and death, Angra Mainyu, who opposes Ahura Mazda.

 

The resulting cosmic conflict involves the entire universe, including humanity who is required to choose which to follow. Evil, and the Spirit of Evil, will be completely destroyed at the end of time. Dualism will come to an end and Goodness will be all in all.

* Another school of thought perceives the battle between Good and Evil as an ethical dualism, set within the human consciousness.

 

* Asha is a form of righteous, an all encompassing, natural law.

 

* Legends, which are probably not those of Zarathushtra's original teachings are:

o After death, a person's urvan (soul) is allowed three days to meditate on his/her past life. The soul is then judged by a troika Mithra, Sraosha and Rashnu. If the good thoughts, words and deeds outweigh the bad, then the soul is taken into heaven. Otherwise, the soul is led to hell.

 

o The universe will go through a total of three eras:

+ Creation;

+ The present world where good and evil are mixed. People's good works are seen as gradually transforming the world towards its heavenly ideal;

+ A final state after this renovation when good and evil will be separated.

 

Eventually, everything will be purified. Even the occupants of hell will be released.

o A Saoshyant (savior) will be born of a virgin, but of the lineage of the Prophet Zoroaster who will raise the dead and judge everyone in a final judgment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tabula, thanks for bringing up Zoroastrianism. Usually it's me doing it. :grin:

 

One more thing about it though, there was a heretic version of it which was called Zurvanism. They believed that Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu were not the real highest creators or gods, but Zurvan was. Zurvan was neither good, nor evil, and the creator of the other two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As in the OP, Where in the OT did it say He was God or heir to God other than here?

 

Not to mention the NT inanity of praying to yourself, and referring to the Father as separate all the time, saying that we could be as he was, et al. Besides, there is always the biggest one, if he was God then dying was not a big sacrifice. Just a momentary interruption in his usual routine. If he was really just a man with a line to God, it strikes me as meaningful.

 

I agree with you, there is a strong case for the non-divinity of Christ within Christianity. Unfortunately thanks to the long running dominance of sects that promoted deity, the idea is rather entrenched. This should be something that Christians can discuss, as it does not have a ready answer but usually that just isn't possible. Almost as if people are afraid to entertain the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tabula, thanks for bringing up Zoroastrianism. Usually it's me doing it. :grin:

 

One more thing about it though, there was a heretic version of it which was called Zurvanism. They believed that Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu were not the real highest creators or gods, but Zurvan was. Zurvan was neither good, nor evil, and the creator of the other two.

 

Yeah, I read into it some time ago...Guess it wouldn't hurt to brush up on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been awhile so I can't quite remember, but I believe there is something in the Gospels about Jesus being the only way to God. Though like all scripture that is open to interpretation.

 

Damn, I may actually have to dust my Bible off and look a few things up.

 

Edit: Ah I see that you are looking for OT precedent, disregard.

 

But yes the idea that theists may have it wrong has occurred to me. :P

 

Careful though, I started my road out of the Church by tossing out Paul too.

 

John 3:16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son

 

John 14: 6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

Acts 4: 12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John 3:16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son

 

John 14: 6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

Acts 4: 12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

 

Yeah, like I said earlier chef. The OT is what I was looking at. There's a ton of verses in the NT. But, if you reference them by most Bible reference guides; where does it take you. Nowhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't John thought to be the latest of the Gospels? No surprise that it really tries to push the deity aspect given the time it would have been compiled.

 

Mark, generally accepted to be the earliest has no such language, save for parts that scholars agree were added at later dates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't John thought to be the latest of the Gospels? No surprise that it really tries to push the deity aspect given the time it would have been compiled.

 

Mark, generally accepted to be the earliest has no such language, save for parts that scholars agree were added at later dates.

 

Yeah. Bringing up the NT, thats an interesting point. John's style is more on the God-man side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tabula, thanks for bringing up Zoroastrianism. Usually it's me doing it. :grin:

 

One more thing about it though, there was a heretic version of it which was called Zurvanism. They believed that Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu were not the real highest creators or gods, but Zurvan was. Zurvan was neither good, nor evil, and the creator of the other two.

 

That's actually a good point with the Zoroastrianism, everything comes to an end at some point. Judaism, split a few times, even Biblically. Biblically, one side stayed with God and the law, the other started to become more political so to speak, wanting a nation, country etc. They divided though, thats the point. Then going into sects of Judaism up to the time of Christ.

 

Islam was just Islam, until Mohammad come around. Then it was more than just Islam. Thats a thought too. There was really only the difference of Ishmael and Issac's blessing issue between Islam and Judaism, before Christ. Right?

 

Anyhow, good point Hans. Even Zoroastrianism broke to, 'another way'. God may have interacted with people, such as Abraham, Jacob, Moses; but people make religion into whatever they want.

 

I still say I'm a Christian, follow the teachings of Jesus, hope the God of Israel isn't bipolar :grin:; but church. Thats different. I went most of my adult life without church, and just see socialistic people in groups of related views and beliefs, all guided by the social/Biblical direction of that church.And, sadly, I think the social image outweighs the Biblical. If you don't 'look and act' like everyone else; you are pre-judged in a sense. Judge not. Right? Doctrine is just that doctrine. All is well and good until you challenge doctrine, then you are the anti Christ.

 

Speaking of doctrine. Didn't someone challenge established doctrine, that started the path of whatever sects outside of RCC there are? I would think as a Protestant, it's hypocritical to go about life unchallenged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John 3:16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son

 

John 14: 6Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

Acts 4: 12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

 

Yeah, like I said earlier chef. The OT is what I was looking at. There's a ton of verses in the NT. But, if you reference them by most Bible reference guides; where does it take you. Nowhere.

 

:huh: I guess I missed that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.