View Single Post
  #14  
Old 05-11-2005, 09:58 PM
nakedsnake nakedsnake is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 68
Default Re: Snake to Draken, come in Draken...

Ahmad,

sorry for the late post but I was working, I see you joined the conversation welcome, and peace be upon you,
Mr. King is mistaken although a great civil rights leader King does not speak with authority when it comes to Christianity. The only men that could speak with authority when it comes to Christ would be Peter, John, James, Luke, Matthew, Mark, Jude and last but not least Paul.
Paul was a Pharisee and was in fact by his own admission opposed to Christ, he became his most loyal follower, why? because he saw him risen! The experiences that lead the disciples to claim he was risen, was just that; the disciples and enemies Paul and James had eyewitness experience's which they believed were literal appearances of the risen Jesus.
Paul himself said; Now if Christ is preached as raised from the dead, how can some of you say, there is no resurrection form the dead? But if there is no resurrection from the dead, then Christ has not been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is without foundation, and so is your faith. 1 Corinthians 15:12-14.

The cause of the start of Christianity was the resurrection, it was not developed later on King is wrong.
The New Testament never says, nor do Christians claim that the title Son of God was only used exclusively for Jesus, The Hebrew ben and Aramic bar, "son' designate not only a male descendant but also a relationship to a community, a country, a species, it all depends on the context. You mention Psalm 2:7 which was originally meant to be for Solomon but was in reality a veiled prophecy about the true Son of God Jesus, that's why the writer of Hebrews uses that Psalm to describe Jesus as superior to the angels and to be God Himself. see Hebrews 1 (the whole chapter).
This formula was then obviously present from the roots of Christianity, Hebrews has been dated at 64 A.D.

you quote from the Quran, but I have a few questions,
Why would Caliph Uthman produce an authorized version of the Quran if the Quran had been perfectly preserved from the beginning?
were you aware that even today, there are variants between different transmitted versions of the Quran-such as the Hafs transmission and the Warsh transmission?
Since there are copies of the Quran that have variant readings, how can it be argued that there has always been "perfect unity" in the copies of the Quran?
While it is claimed that Allah preserved the Quran in infallible copies are we to conclude that Allah was incapable of accomplishing the same feat regarding all his previous revelations, like the Psalms of David and the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Do you see the inconsistency with such a viewpoint?
Paul warned of people or angels (Mohammed received his revelations by angel) changing the Gospel of Christ.
But I can't quote from the Bible because the Bible is corrupted (Muslim Viewpoint), the only parts of the Bible that agree with the Quran are valid, that my friend is a circular argument. And circular arguments are falsehoods.
Reply With Quote