Google Earth proves Muhammad-Islam

reply to post by ManBehindTheMask


"ST PAUL", the True Founder of Christianity

Most Christians would say that their religion is based on the teachings of Jesus, in words divinely inspired to men who wrote the New Testament. But the first books of the New Testament all came from one man, Paul of Tarsus. The books were later rearranged to take some of the emphasis off of Paul, but it is impossible to deny that he was the primary architect of what would become Christianity. Paul of Tarsus, or Saint Paul, is the person most responsible for the spread of Christianity. Without Paul, Christianity may have well died as an obscure apocalyptic Jewish sect. Paul wrote up to about half of the New Testament. It isn't known exactly how much of the book is attributable to Paul. His influence on the bible is hard to discount. Many Christians will tell you that his words were God inspired, so it doesn't matter who actually penned them, or when. If that is true, it doesn't explain the myriad contradictions between the ideas of Paul and the rest of the bible. Paul knew little of the actual life and history of Jesus, and most likely never met him. What mattered to Paul was the resurrected Christ and his soon return. Paul was very apocalyptic and believed the return of Christ to be imminent, and preached so. In his letters and writings that became part of the Christian New Testament, Paul put forth much of the doctrine followed by Christians today. Paul had very stern things to say when it came to matters of home life, including husband wife relationships and sexuality. He wrote that a woman "may not teach or have authority over a man" although Jesus never said that. He also railed against homosexuality, another subject not mentioned by Christ. Paul may well have been the first popular Christian homophobe. One of the most important differences in the teachings of Paul as they differed from what other Christians at the time were teaching and learning was the doctrine of salvation through grace. Essentially, Paul taught that the lost are forgiven through the grace of God, not through any works. This has come to be an excuse "out" whereas individual Christians and Churches separate themselves from the teachings of Jesus, which were clearly different. Instead of having to live a life that helps others, Christians were able to free themselves from the heavy responsibilities for others that Christ taught. But however one comes down on the man himself and how he related (or manufactured) Christian doctrine, his influence throughout the Mediterranean and the Mideast cannot be denied. He dedicated a good portion of his life to traveling throughout the area, converting Gentiles to Christianity. Churches that he started grew until Christianity overtook the Pagan traditions and eventually led to the demise of those traditions. That's where my problem with Paul comes in. If you look at the history of the cities he visited, there is one thing in common. As his new religion took hold, the city declined. Up to and including Rome itself. As Christianity rose, the power of the empire faded. It could be argued that Christianity so weakened Rome that it was unable to withstand barbarian attacks, and so fell. There are many arguments for why Rome fell. Economic reasons, dilution of the military with conquered peoples, disregard of civic responsibilities, the splitting of the empire, the list can go on. Historians differ as to the causes of the fall of the Roman Empire, and the subsequent plunge of the entire region into the Dark Ages. I would say that the Apostle Paul played a very important role. For this statement to make sense, one has to imagine the mindset of the early Christians. They were very apocalyptic, sure that the end was near. They felt no need at all to be concerned with the world around them. So they let the world around them fall. Of course, there were outside pressures and influences. But the fact remains, the Roman Empire did not fall solely on the battlefield, it also decayed from within. That is the important lesson we can draw that can help us today. For today, we have many people in America who feel the same way. That the end is near, and that it is ordained to be so. And they also think that for the return of Christ to happen, there needs to be a world war first. This is the dangerous mindset that pushes the Bush agenda when it comes to Israel and Iran. In Ephesus, Antioch, and Rome, the same thing happened after the teachings of Paul took hold. The city declined, eventually falling. How could anything else be expected, when so many of those who lived there thought the end was imminent? If we in America are to avoid the same fate, we need to focus on the world around us. We need to solve the global warming crisis. We need to learn how to establish dialog instead of bombing targets. In short, we need to act like we will be here tomorrow-and the day after. The lesson we can learn is that we have to be in the now, and deal with the world around us-not waste our time here waiting for the next. One can only imagine what the world might be like if the Hellenistic and Roman traditions could have endured longer. Could we have avoided the Dark Ages? Big history very often turns on small events.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
I find it interesting.....

And this proves my theory in my mind, that there is a war against Christains........

If this title said "google earth proves Christianity/Christ" It would have gotten barely any flags or stars....

And the OP would have been torn apart by the anti-religious crowd.......


IInstead, I watch the other religion, who in parts of the world all over, is infested with suicide bombers, and thousands of families of mothers who urge their sons into martyrdom to die for it, flagged and starred like there is no tomorrow........

People have lost their minds

There has always been a war against Christians. Islam is against all religions
There is nothing new there since Islam is not really a religion
As Christians we are taught to forgive and

reply to post by iIuminaIi


Muhammad is not prophesied in the Holy Bible. Also, the Holy Spirit is part of the Holy Trinity. The Holy Spirit is God. An angel is a created being. It is not the Holy Spirit. Boy deception runs deep.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL


Adan/Unknown mosque: Could not find information about which mosque he was referring too:

Not sure if this helps in anyway but I believe you may be referring to "Sabancı Merkez Camii" located in Adana Turkey. It is commonly called the Adana Mosque.

Interesting thread, haven't got a chance to read all the comments but soon!

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by iIuminaIi

 

Muhammad is not prophesied in the Holy Bible. Also, the Holy Spirit is part of the Holy Trinity. The Holy Spirit is God. An angel is a created being. It is not the Holy Spirit. Boy deception runs deep.

edit on 28-5-2012 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)

Sorry you are wrong there
Muhammad IS prophesied in the Holy Bible

Deu 18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
Deu 18:21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?
Deu 18:22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

Matthew 24:11
Viewing the 1769 King James Version. Click to switch to 1611 King James Version of Matthew 24:11
And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Originally posted by soaringhawk
reply to post by iIuminaIi

 

Muhammad is not prophesied in the Holy Bible. Also, the Holy Spirit is part of the Holy Trinity. The Holy Spirit is God. An angel is a created being. It is not the Holy Spirit. Boy deception runs deep.

edit on 28-5-2012 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)

The word “Trinity” does not exist anywhere in the Bible.

Let me clarify this:

Christian monotheistic belief is summarized by the following seven points:

1. The Father is God.
2. The Son is God.
3. The Holy Spirit is God.
4. The Father is not the Son.
5. The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
6. The Holy Spirit is not the Father.
7. There is only one God.

When Christians say: (1) The Father is God; (2) The Son is God; and (3) The Holy Spirit is God we are identifying Who God is.

When we say: (4) The Father is not the Son; (5) The Son is not the Holy Spirit; and (6) The Holy Spirit is not the Father we are distinguishing the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The seventh and the final statement is the most challenging, “There is only one God”. The Greeks would say, “Zeus is god, “Apollos is god, and Dionysius is god” and there are three gods. Christianity says, the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God and there is only one God.

To help clarify the above seven points, please consider the following diagram:



The Christian Doctrine of the Trinity, and Belief in One God Involves Mystery

Now, the question boils down to this: Is this what the Bible teaches? Since the Bible teaches this but we can’t fully comprehend it – that is OK. We must leave room for mystery in our theology.

In church history Saint Augustine (354-430) probably thought more about the doctrine of the Trinity than any other uninspired writer, with the possible exception of John Calvin. There is a story about Augustine walking upon the ocean’s shore, greatly perplexed about the doctrine of the Trinity. As he meditated, he observed a little boy with a sea shell, running to the water, filling his shell, and then pouring it into a hole which he had made in the sand.

“What are you doing, my little man?” asked Augustine.

“Oh,” replied the boy, “I am trying to put the ocean in this hole.”

Augustine had learned his lesson, and as he passed on, exclaimed, “That is what I am trying to do; I see it now. Standing on the shores of time I am trying to get into this little finite mind things which are infinite.”

It should come as no surprise that the Christian belief in the Triune God involves mysteries that transcend the human mind.


Just for the laugh

The trinity explained

reply to post by iIuminaIi


I understand why that boy was wearing a ski mask
Did you hear about that old Qumran they found?
They claim it is the oldest one yet.
Funny thing is these figured out that it states that the angle that spoke to marry told her it was the Christ
A little over eight minutes in

Continued.... Reply to soaringhawk



Oldest Bible found in Palestine

Oldest Bible found in Palestine - Jesus was a servant of God and not God himself or the son of God - Trinity False

Interesting an old Koran that says Jesus is Christ and a bible that says he wasn’t. If that is the book its doing very well for its age, looks as though its no more than 100 years old. A Jewish bible would want the crucifixion left out since they were responsible. However, the Holy Bible is written exactly the way the author intended it to be.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Six6Six

 

Do NOT forget that Mohammed married a six year old, raped her at 9 (or had intercourse) and was illiterate. Plus he condoned murder of anyone who spoke against Allah.

First of all the marriage was in heaven, he was told this will be your future wife. Secondly it was normal in those days to marry young, even your great great grand parents most likely did the same. It was normal at that time. Don't be an idiot.

Wrong as per usual......in those days girls did marry young. However, it was what we called forced marriage. The girl had NO choice in the matter. So unless two parties willingly agree to marriage (without the fear of DEATH from their fathers or family). So it is still RAPE. RAPE IS RAPE regardless of whether everyone is doing it. Grow up boy.

Plus Islamic people misunderstood what Mohammed was.....he was a Warner. The koran is so contradictory it read like a cartoon strip. He is refereed to by himself as nothing but a Warner.

Marrying a SIX year old is not OK no matter what century. But then again I have read your view of women in previous threads and I get the feeling that you are inclined to sympathize with PEDOPHILES. You are what you are.

Originally posted by redneck13
the Holy Bible is written exactly the way the author intended it to be.

Is the Bible which you own and read today a real Bible? Or has it been distorted? How can you believe the Bible if you do not even know if it is accurate? Nowadays, there are scores of English versions of the Bible. Many people wonder how accurate these Bibles are. When people ask about the accuracy of the Bible, there are two different issues they might have in mind:

A.Is the Bible really from God?

B.Has the Bible been accurately preserved over the centuries?

There are 24,000 manuscripts of the New Testament, 5,000 of which were written in the original Greek language. Of these thousands of manuscripts, no two manuscripts are identical. These differences lead to hundreds of thousands of variations. At first impression, this fact makes the Bible sound like the most unreliable book possible! These variations, however, are surprisingly not a major concern. Rather, more manuscripts lead to a greater possibility of figuring out what the original was. F.F. Bruce explained it well:

Fortunately, if the great number of MSS [manuscripts] increases the number of scribal errors, it increases proportionately the means of correcting such errors, so that the margin of doubt left in the process of recovering the exact original wording is not so large as might be feared; it is in truth remarkably small.

For instance, if I only have 2 manuscripts, I would be unable to figure out which of the following is correct:

Manuscript #1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

Manuscript #2: In the beginning, God created the earth and the heavens.

Either of these could be correct. It’s a 50-50 chance.

However, if I have more manuscripts, it will be quite easy to figure out what was most likely the original passage, even though none of the following are exactly correct. I have marked which parts of each variant are differing from the others. By removing each of these variants, I will be able to best get at the original phrase:

Manuscript #1: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

Manuscript #2: In the beginning, God created the earth and the heavens.

Manuscript #3: At the beginning, God made the heaven_ and the earth.

Manuscript #4: In the beginning, Jesus created the heavens and the earth.

Manuscript #5: In the beginning, God created the sky and the earth.

*Original: In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

Thus, even though none of the multiple manuscripts match up exactly, they allow us to find the most probable original.

The process of finding the original text is called Textual Criticism, which does not mean criticizing the text! Rather, it is a systematic way to determine which text was more likely the original. Very basically, four points show how to find the preferred text: 1) The shorter text, since scribes would rather add to God’s Word than risk taking anything away, 2) the older text, for it had less time to be corrupted, 3) the harder reading, because scribes tried to smooth out the reading and make it more understandable, and 4) most importantly, the text from which the others could have come. Textual criticism is more complicated than this, but the idea is the same—in most cases, it is easy to find the original reading....Unaltered book is the last testament Al Qur'an

reply to post by iIuminaIi


Hi,

Can you please offer some details of this bible for those that can't or are not interested in watching the video?

Is it referring to the Didache?

Thanks,

Eric

I guess Allah gave permission to Mohammed to rape young girls, become a caravan raider, take slaves from caravans, and murder/decapitate people who had surrendered to him... Not to mention the fact that Mohammed broke many of the so called laws. Each Muslim was only supposed to marry/slave 4 women. Muhammed got 12...including a 6-9 year old...

Divine inspiration huh?...

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Why would Satan want Muhammad to make a new mosque facing mecca? Would that not be leading him on the right path? If it were Satan giving information to him would it not be the wrong direction?

Not that I give a flying monkey about this, but this is simple: When you want someone to believe you're the legitimate ruler of their life, you've got to give them enough truth to make it believable--especially if the human in question is smart. This makes the information, if it came from a spiritual source, as something worth noting. It does NOT automatically mean that this being has the authority over you and your life.

A.Is the Bible really from God?
YES

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


Mohammed received information from his angel friend.
A man that attempted to kill Mohammed claims he was protected by some one that so bright he could not see.

2 Corinthians 11
King James Version (KJV)

13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light

Originally posted by Praetorius

Is it also possible the assistance came from a source opposing the actual will of God, and seeking to establish a false religion?

I love these two words together.

"False", then "Religion" directly after it.

Oxymoron for sure.

Are you trying to say that previous civilizations did not know about straight lines? Was it "Divine Intervention"
to find the most direct route between two areas 900 miles apart? This not a revelation that Islam was the only group that could do this (Egypt).

Stories like this have been popping up since Iran started their 12th Imam propaganda. Radical Islamic groups have followed suit trying to made their perversion of the religion of Islam seem like they are not blood thirsty killers that want to take Islam back to the dark ages. Their distorted view of Islam is for their own quest for power and to subjugate their own people. These throwbacks think they can stop progress and especially the progress of women. These perverter's of Islam want to be the ones that all must bow to and are not interested in things like freedom, truth, love, or any of the things we are taught that God wishes for all of us.

reply to post by redneck13

I wasn't going to a conclusion, is all. For me to go there requires giving them REASON to believe that verse is true, and I wasn't looking for that argument at this moment (yes, I believe in the verse, within context). It was simply that for another being to lie to you, it has to be credible enough for you to believe. There's more to choosing your deity than merely finding them credible.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel


Well,
I had no idea you were selecting your deity and I didn’t mean to interrupt but,
I would say finding them credible is a big part of it.
You could always select the one Mohammed grew up with.
The Sabian Moon God Allah
They are also tolerated by Muslims