Jesus was a "Muslim"

reply to post by logical7

The objection i have is you telling me what God i worship

Yup.

Funny how Christians go around deciding who worships who.

But if someone were to tell them that Jesus was modelled after Mithras, they throw a fit, or use the bible to defend their beliefs.

This cartoon sums it up best...


I know its an atheist cartoon, but it sums up the point.

reply to post by WarminIndy

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Nope, got it from a pro-Muslim website. I gave the link, so go look at it. I could not even make that up if I tried. But here is the link again...
Muttaqun Online

When you want to know the most about the Quran, you either read it for yourself (which I have) or you read it from someone who has. If you have problems with these Muslims saying this, then go contact the site and inform them of their error. Otherwise, don't complain to us that these people said it.

Again with this same line. Who says it is a pro-muslim website? I know nothing about it. I should just accept it because you say so? Because IT says so? Who made them experts? I didn't. They didn't. There doesn't even appear to be any information on who exactly the group is or what qualifications they have.

Even if it is a "pro-muslim website", it has been found wrong on 2 occasions now, yet you still use it. You say you've read the Quran. If you have, then why do you need to use this website? Why can't you simply reference what you are talking about directly?
And sorry, if you are the one who keeps bringing up incorrect information, it doesn't matter where you get it from. Since we are talking and discussing on these ATS forums, my interaction is with YOU, not with the website.

It seems very disingenuous to have a line of argument of "Hahaha...Islam is so wrong, look what wrong things the Quran says" and then when you get told that the Quran says no such thing, you respond with "Hey, I read it on a website, so it must be true!"

You say you've read the Quran...even if you haven't, even if you are getting your information from dubious sources, at least you should check whatever references they give to see if they are correct. If they don't provide references, then why listen to them?

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

The objection i have is you telling me what God i worship or even going and assuming that all the muslims are pagans? So i had to bring to notice that nobody can reach up to catholic church in the acceptance of paganism, they went to the lengths of erasing a commandment to accomodate statues to please their roman masters and crowds.
.

.
and about your accusations regarding Islam and Muhammad(pbuh) i can tell you, i agree 100% with Umar(ra)
and the prophet dint worship alongside pagans after having control of makkah and to this day no pagans are allowed near Kabah.
.
And pointing at something and saying "Allah hu Akbar"(Allah is greater/greatest) doesnt make that thing god, pointing at it was a symbolic act of touching from a distance. And a muslim can say "Allah hu Akbar" and even bow down in front of a tree while praying. And only a pagan would assume that he is worshipping the tree or calling it god.

And the assumption again is that I am Catholic, which I am not. By the very act of bowing down is worship. Would you like the Hadith on Mohammed worshiping with the pagans in Mecca? OK here it is....

Bukhari V2, B26, #689 (V1, B8, No 365): Narrated Abu Huraira: “In the year prior to the last Hajj of the Prophet when Allahs Apostle made Abu Bakr the leader of the pilgrims, the latter (Abu Bakr) sent me in the company of a group of people to make a public announcement: 'No pagan is allowed to perform Hajj after this year, and no naked person is allowed to perform Tawaf of the Kaba.'”

Mohammed worshiped with pagans. Abu Bakr was the one who who said no pagans were allowed there. Now who is this Abu Bakr? The father of Aisha and the first caliph who fought with Ali in the Battle of the Camels.

Are you still sure 100%?

Now as far as that goes about Canaanites and the Hebrews, yes at different time the Hebrews did fall into idol worship, the Bible says they did. No one is disputing this fact. Yes, Suleiman did have pagan wives, which he was commanded not to, but did anyway and was led away by them. Elijah stood up to the 400 prophets of Ba'al and God consumed his sacrifice. This is not a new thing, we all know this happened.

Now the accusations you have made against the Roman Catholic faith, yes, paganism has influenced that as well, but again I am not Catholic as I belong to the original Christian faith founded on the testimony of Peter that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God of which over 300 OT prophecies came to pass about Him.

The Book of Isaiah is exactly the same as it was written. And because the Jews rejected Jesus does not mean they always will, Bible prophecy is very clear that one day they will accept Him. About the prophecy of Jesus from Isaiah "Unto us a son is born, unto us a son is given, and He shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. And upon His shoulders shall be His government and His government shall have no end". Unto whom? Who was the son born to? Isaiah was a Jewish prophet.

When you discuss a religion, you must always go back to the author of that religion. Mohammed was the author of Islam, therefore it is his words and deeds we have to look at. If you dislike the Quranic verses and Hadiths, take that up with Islamic scholars who provided the information. If I had posted only nice verses and hadiths, then you would have been happy because that is the whitewashed version the west has been given. So why dispute the bad things if they come from the same Quran and Hadiths? I am not the writer of either one and neither are you. So take the good and the bad, every Christian and Jew accepts that prophets were not always righteous or even right. They were not always good and they sinned. We accept that, so why can't you apply the same thing to yours? Oh yes, because yours said to overlook his indiscretions.

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Nope, got it from a pro-Muslim website. I gave the link, so go look at it. I could not even make that up if I tried. But here is the link again...
Muttaqun Online

When you want to know the most about the Quran, you either read it for yourself (which I have) or you read it from someone who has. If you have problems with these Muslims saying this, then go contact the site and inform them of their error. Otherwise, don't complain to us that these people said it.

Again with this same line. Who says it is a pro-muslim website? I know nothing about it. I should just accept it because you say so? Because IT says so? Who made them experts? I didn't. They didn't. There doesn't even appear to be any information on who exactly the group is or what qualifications they have.

Even if it is a "pro-muslim website", it has been found wrong on 2 occasions now, yet you still use it. You say you've read the Quran. If you have, then why do you need to use this website? Why can't you simply reference what you are talking about directly?
And sorry, if you are the one who keeps bringing up incorrect information, it doesn't matter where you get it from. Since we are talking and discussing on these ATS forums, my interaction is with YOU, not with the website.

It seems very disingenuous to have a line of argument of "Hahaha...Islam is so wrong, look what wrong things the Quran says" and then when you get told that the Quran says no such thing, you respond with "Hey, I read it on a website, so it must be true!"

Show me the two occasions that was wrong. Just because you and another guy says it is wrong and yet neither of you are Islamic scholars? That is what Muslims always say when a Quranic verse or Hadith is shown that disparage Mohammed. So my question to you is this.....if those verses disparage Mohammed, then why are they allowed to remain?

It was not a Christian or Jew who made that website, those were Muslims of the Islamic faith. If you dislike that information, go to them and tell them they are wrong, don't tell me because I am not the one who made the website.

MOL is comprised of Muslims across the globe whose goals are not limited to, but include the following: to spread daw'ah,to encourage piety,to provide a halal, online gathering place,and to provide resources for Islamic research and study. Our purpose is not to impress anyone, appease anyone, or to bring attention to ourselves. Our soul purpose, insha'Allah, is for the sake of Allah, subhana wa ta'ala. We pray that Allah, subhana wa ta'ala, will be pleased with our actions and direct us away from error and bid'a (innovation in religion), keeping us upon the sirataal mustaqeem (path [that is] straight). 'Ameen.

So are you disputing their Muslimness? Are you saying they are not correct Muslims?

On this website, you can even learn Arabic. Isn't that a wonderful thing? They are providing services to make better Muslims and you are disputing your Muslim brothers who provided the information.

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

The objection i have is you telling me what God i worship or even going and assuming that all the muslims are pagans? So i had to bring to notice that nobody can reach up to catholic church in the acceptance of paganism, they went to the lengths of erasing a commandment to accomodate statues to please their roman masters and crowds.
.

.
and about your accusations regarding Islam and Muhammad(pbuh) i can tell you, i agree 100% with Umar(ra)
and the prophet dint worship alongside pagans after having control of makkah and to this day no pagans are allowed near Kabah.
.
And pointing at something and saying "Allah hu Akbar"(Allah is greater/greatest) doesnt make that thing god, pointing at it was a symbolic act of touching from a distance. And a muslim can say "Allah hu Akbar" and even bow down in front of a tree while praying. And only a pagan would assume that he is worshipping the tree or calling it god.

And the assumption again is that I am Catholic, which I am not. By the very act of bowing down is worship. Would you like the Hadith on Mohammed worshiping with the pagans in Mecca? OK here it is....

Bukhari V2, B26, #689 (V1, B8, No 365): Narrated Abu Huraira: “In the year prior to the last Hajj of the Prophet when Allahs Apostle made Abu Bakr the leader of the pilgrims, the latter (Abu Bakr) sent me in the company of a group of people to make a public announcement: 'No pagan is allowed to perform Hajj after this year, and no naked person is allowed to perform Tawaf of the Kaba.'”

Mohammed worshiped with pagans. Abu Bakr was the one who who said no pagans were allowed there. Now who is this Abu Bakr? The father of Aisha and the first caliph who fought with Ali in the Battle of the Camels.

Are you still sure 100%?

Now as far as that goes about Canaanites and the Hebrews, yes at different time the Hebrews did fall into idol worship, the Bible says they did. No one is disputing this fact. Yes, Suleiman did have pagan wives, which he was commanded not to, but did anyway and was led away by them. Elijah stood up to the 400 prophets of Ba'al and God consumed his sacrifice. This is not a new thing, we all know this happened.

Now the accusations you have made against the Roman Catholic faith, yes, paganism has influenced that as well, but again I am not Catholic as I belong to the original Christian faith founded on the testimony of Peter that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God of which over 300 OT prophecies came to pass about Him.

The Book of Isaiah is exactly the same as it was written. And because the Jews rejected Jesus does not mean they always will, Bible prophecy is very clear that one day they will accept Him. About the prophecy of Jesus from Isaiah "Unto us a son is born, unto us a son is given, and He shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. And upon His shoulders shall be His government and His government shall have no end". Unto whom? Who was the son born to? Isaiah was a Jewish prophet.

When you discuss a religion, you must always go back to the author of that religion. Mohammed was the author of Islam, therefore it is his words and deeds we have to look at. If you dislike the Quranic verses and Hadiths, take that up with Islamic scholars who provided the information. If I had posted only nice verses and hadiths, then you would have been happy because that is the whitewashed version the west has been given. So why dispute the bad things if they come from the same Quran and Hadiths? I am not the writer of either one and neither are you. So take the good and the bad, every Christian and Jew accepts that prophets were not always righteous or even right. They were not always good and they sinned. We accept that, so why can't you apply the same thing to yours? Oh yes, because yours said to overlook his indiscretions.

why do you assume that whatever your are telling is NEWS to me?
and i am not assuming that you are chatholic, but i am assuming that you believe God has a son.
the makkans were performing hajj, long before Muhammad(pbuh) actually it was started by Abraham(pbuh) but they had introduced paganism in it, moving naked etc,in short a lot of ignorance.
so after Kabah was restored with muslims, they stopped the pagans.
a verse was revealed in that effect. whats so sectacular about that?

reply to post by babloyi

It seems very disingenuous to have a line of argument of "Hahaha...Islam is so wrong, look what wrong things the Quran says" and then when you get told that the Quran says no such thing, you respond with "Hey, I read it on a website, so it must be true!"

So show them what the Catholics/JWs/Mormon/ whoever else are saying on their websites and say "Hey, these guys call themselves Christians and look what they are saying".

Christians cant even agree among themselves on so many matters.... and they have the nerve to go around telling others they are wrong.

reply to post by WarminIndy

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Show me the two occasions that was wrong. Just because you and another guy says it is wrong and yet neither of you are Islamic scholars? That is what Muslims always say when a Quranic verse or Hadith is shown that disparage Mohammed. So my question to you is this.....if those verses disparage Mohammed, then why are they allowed to remain?

I did. The first time was when you claimed (yes, you, you may have linked to a website that was making the claim, but you were supporting them, and I am talking to YOU here, not a website) that the Quran said/implied Adam and Moses were alive at the same time. The hilarious thing here was that you provided verse numbers as reference, but if you went to those verses, you'd see no mention of this claim.

The second case was right here, where you claim that the Quran says that the Angel Michael "brings rain". This too is objectively false, and very easy to disprove. Go to any quran translation website. Two I use are:
www.islamawakened.com...
www.cmje.org...
And do a search for "Michael" or even "Mikha'il". You will only find one reference, which is the one I mentioned in the post where I addressed this point of yours. And that reference has nothing to do with bringing rain.

Neither of these two supposed verses disparage Muhammad in any way, they just happen to be totally, provably, objectively WRONG. They don't exist.

Originally posted by WarminIndy
It was not a Christian or Jew who made that website, those were Muslims of the Islamic faith. If you dislike that information, go to them and tell them they are wrong, don't tell me because I am not the one who made the website.

You didn't make the website, but you keep bringing it up as "proof" of various points. So yeah, I will tell you you are wrong if you keep bringing up wrong points. I'm not debating with the website. I'm in no contact with the website at all. I am talking to YOU. The "endpoint" source is very easily accessible. The Quran. Available online for extensive word-by-word, translation-by-translation searching. Since you say you've read the Quran already, you can easily do a "That point was in that general area", and then search for it there. IF you've read the Quran.

As skorpion says, I could bring up several dozen "Christian" websites (and not just from the controversial sects) that hold views that you might disagree with ("Jesus is not God" "Jesus is God" "Jesus is the son of God" "Salvation can only be attained through faith" "Salvation requires works" "Physical baptism is necessary" "Physical baptism is not necessary" "Divorce is permitted" "Divorce is not permitted" etc.), the ultimate proof doesn't lie with them, it lies with the scripture itself.

wrong,wrong,wrong, if they say that jesus was a muslim that mean they are right he was ,and about jesus, crucified your wrong too ... everyone should know that jesus was never crucified it was someone that looks like him "allah" wouldn't allow for his prophet to be crucified , then "allah" took jesus to the heaven's , jesus is not dead yet . untill the day "allah" command him to go back to earth to help the Muslims to fight against the non-Muslims no matter who they are Jew or Buddhist or Jedi .... anyway to clarify that day is near i don't know when but its coming... prepare your self lol...

Originally posted by babloyi
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Originally posted by WarminIndy
Show me the two occasions that was wrong. Just because you and another guy says it is wrong and yet neither of you are Islamic scholars? That is what Muslims always say when a Quranic verse or Hadith is shown that disparage Mohammed. So my question to you is this.....if those verses disparage Mohammed, then why are they allowed to remain?

I did. The first time was when you claimed (yes, you, you may have linked to a website that was making the claim, but you were supporting them, and I am talking to YOU here, not a website) that the Quran said/implied Adam and Moses were alive at the same time. The hilarious thing here was that you provided verse numbers as reference, but if you went to those verses, you'd see no mention of this claim.

The second case was right here, where you claim that the Quran says that the Angel Michael "brings rain". This too is objectively false, and very easy to disprove. Go to any quran translation website. Two I use are:
www.islamawakened.com...
www.cmje.org...
And do a search for "Michael" or even "Mikha'il". You will only find one reference, which is the one I mentioned in the post where I addressed this point of yours. And that reference has nothing to do with bringing rain.

Neither of these two supposed verses disparage Muhammad in any way, they just happen to be totally, provably, objectively WRONG. They don't exist.

Originally posted by WarminIndy
It was not a Christian or Jew who made that website, those were Muslims of the Islamic faith. If you dislike that information, go to them and tell them they are wrong, don't tell me because I am not the one who made the website.

You didn't make the website, but you keep bringing it up as "proof" of various points. So yeah, I will tell you you are wrong if you keep bringing up wrong points. I'm not debating with the website. I'm in no contact with the website at all. I am talking to YOU. The "endpoint" source is very easily accessible. The Quran. Available online for extensive word-by-word, translation-by-translation searching. Since you say you've read the Quran already, you can easily do a "That point was in that general area", and then search for it there. IF you've read the Quran.

As skorpion says, I could bring up several dozen "Christian" websites (and not just from the controversial sects) that hold views that you might disagree with ("Jesus is not God" "Jesus is God" "Jesus is the son of God" "Salvation can only be attained through faith" "Salvation requires works" "Physical baptism is necessary" "Physical baptism is not necessary" "Divorce is permitted" "Divorce is not permitted" etc.), the ultimate proof doesn't lie with them, it lies with the scripture itself.

edit on 5-10-2012 by babloyi because: (no reason given)

So then we are agreed, not all Muslims agree about the Quran or the Hadiths. The problem is that when a Christian posts a Quran verse, Muslims disagree with that verse and say we need context, then when we show the context, they say it has to be read in Arabic, of even which a vast majority of Muslims themselves cannot do. Then when we post Hadiths, Muslims then say that it might be a weak one or that they don't believe in the Hadiths. What are we left with? The words of Muslims themselves.

There is no archeological evidence anywhere in the world that supports Abraham being in Mecca, not even the Bible which the Quran says to believes, then says it was corrupted. And yet no evidence is ever presented of who corrupted it and when.

Yes, I have indeed read the Quran and I will post those verses. I posted Bukhari Hadiths, those are accepted. And now I suppose I should post the Tafsirs. It is not my job to recognize who is Sunni, Shia, Wahabi or whatever. You guys are the ones who fight over that one.

Now the point was from that website is that to be a good Muslim one must say the shahada and that one must believe in angels.

The title of this thread is "Jesus was a Muslim" and the only "proof" you have is that Mohammed said it. Mohammed may never have said it, because the only Quranic verses you have was from Uthman. Everything you know about Mohammed was from Uthman. How do you know Uthman was right?

Originally posted by logical7

Originally posted by WarminIndy

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

why do you assume that whatever your are telling is NEWS to me?
and i am not assuming that you are chatholic, but i am assuming that you believe God has a son.
the makkans were performing hajj, long before Muhammad(pbuh) actually it was started by Abraham(pbuh) but they had introduced paganism in it, moving naked etc,in short a lot of ignorance.
so after Kabah was restored with muslims, they stopped the pagans.
a verse was revealed in that effect. whats so sectacular about that?

edit on 5-10-2012 by logical7 because: (no reason given)

Do you have any evidence outside the Quran to support that claim? What you had first said was the Mohammed never performed hajj with pagans. I gave you the hadith, then you say "oh yes pagans were doing that a long time before"...the hadith says Mohammed worship right along side pagans, even while they were naked, but only Abu Bakr commanded it to stop, not Mohammed.

Give me the verse where Mohammed commanded it to stop. In all those Quranic verses of the period of his "revelations" he was in the kaaba uttering the same prayers as the pagans, with the pagans, doing what the pagans did and at times acknowledging the pagan religions. So give the verse supporting Mohammed saying to stop it.

I did not even go into the verses about the Sabians, I saved us both a lot of time on that one, but perhaps we could explore the Quran to see what Mohammed said about them. And the Sabians, there is a lot of evidence outside the Quran about them. Perhaps we can see what was said about them?

reply to post by WarminIndy


Quran 9:28
O you who have believed, indeed the
polytheists are unclean, so let them
not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after
this, their [final] year. And if you fear
privation, Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is
Knowing and Wise.

Originally posted by logical7

which Book? and why just one? There are at least three, OT,NT,QURAN.

Are they not all One? If they are not, then they belong to separate gods. if they are separate, then so their respective gods are also separate. If there is only one God, then he has only one word, and if the three are separate, then at least one of them must be false, and of a false god.

If, on the other hand, they are all of one God, then they are all One Book.

Originally posted by logical7
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Quran 9:28
O you who have believed, indeed the
polytheists are unclean, so let them
not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after
this, their [final] year. And if you fear
privation, Allah will enrich you from His bounty if He wills. Indeed, Allah is
Knowing and Wise.

And that verse corresponds with what Abu Bakr said. It has already been proven by the Hadith that was Abu Bakr's words, not Mohammed's. So please, show me Mohammed's words, and not Abu Bakr's.

reply to post by nenothtu

Oh man ... that was well put.
Considering how they contradict each other .. they can't all be from the same source.

reply to post by WarminIndy

Originally posted by WarminIndy
So then we are agreed, not all Muslims agree about the Quran or the Hadiths.

Are we? I don't remember agreeing to any such thing. All muslims agree on the Quran. If something isn't there, then it isn't there. I have no idea about your sources, only that you keep referencing them and they are wrong or being misrepresented. I can only talk about the Quran.
I'm sorry, but trying to paint multiple variations of the Quran to the level where one mentions Michael bringing rain and one doesn't, and one where Adam and Moses are alive at the same time and one where they aren't....is just stupid. Such a thing doesn't exist.
So yeah, trying to cover one's mistakes and errors with "Oh, so muslims seem to disagree with each other about the basics of the Quran, poor muslims, all their sects, not agreeing with each other, ...such vagueness and everything can be misunderstood, etc. etc.", doesn't work in this case. Sorry.

Originally posted by WarminIndy
There is no archeological evidence anywhere in the world that supports Abraham being in Mecca, not even the Bible which the Quran says to believes, then says it was corrupted. And yet no evidence is ever presented of who corrupted it and when.

There is no "archeological(sic) evidence" of the existence of the Biblical Abraham at all. All we know is that the name (along with Abram) was not uncommon at the time.
And there is NO EVIDENCE of the Bible being corrupted? Are you serious? This isn't an exclusively muslim claim. There is tonnes and tonnes of scholarship on the subject. I'm sure you can find it easily enough.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by logical7

which Book? and why just one? There are at least three, OT,NT,QURAN.

Are they not all One? If they are not, then they belong to separate gods. if they are separate, then so their respective gods are also separate. If there is only one God, then he has only one word, and if the three are separate, then at least one of them must be false, and of a false god.

If, on the other hand, they are all of one God, then they are all One Book.

edit on 2012/10/5 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)

Not only that but they would all compliment eachother and validate eachother. OT and NT validate eachother, what you find in one is found in the other and vice-versa because they're both established through Torah. Quran jews must be exterminated, OT and NT they will be redeemed. Both OT and NT establish the identity of God, Quran? God has no name, he has a title for a name. OT and NT his name is to be proclaimed to all the world. Quran, well you can't proclaim what was never given. Who are the people of the book?

reply to post by babloyi

There is no "archeological(sic) evidence" of the existence of the Biblical Abraham at all. All we know is that the name (along with Abram) was not uncommon at the time.

No there is no evidence discovered yet for the existence of Abraham himself, but there is plenty of evidence surrounding him and the things spoken of in Genesis. There is also archeaological evidence of the Exodus. Found in both the Stele of Ahmose and in the Ipuwer Papyrus details of the plagues and things going on during that time. There is also archeaological evidence of the tabernacle at Mt. Sinai, the altar of the golden calf, the grave site of the 3000 executed for worshipping the golden calf aqnd even the markers Moses placed around Mt. Sinai so no one would accidentally approach it and be killed. Even the stone Moses struck water from was discovered with evidence a rather large stream flowed from it up out of the ground. All of this at Jubal al'Lawz in the north eastern region of Saudi Arabia (ancient Midia) nort far from the southern border of Jordan.

And there is NO EVIDENCE of the Bible being corrupted? Are you serious? This isn't an exclusively muslim claim. There is tonnes and tonnes of scholarship on the subject. I'm sure you can find it easily enough

Hows about you enlighten us, i'm lazy and don't feel like doing all the looking myself right now. So show me where the bible is corrupted. I have a lexicon and a fellow named Dr, Michael Brown who wouldn't mind disputing that.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Not only that but they would all compliment eachother and validate eachother. OT and NT validate eachother,

Gee, is that why Christians and Jews dont agree with each other on so many things?
Is that why Christians cant agree among themselves on so many matter. (For example, you guys cant even agree on who that son of man on the clouds is, like we saw in that other thread)

The OT and NT appear to validate each other when you skew and misread verses.

For example, the phrase "Let us create" and the three men who visited Abraham in Genesis... magically becomes evidence for the trinity. Forget the fact that God, who Himself spoke in the OT, never said he was triune.

Quran jews must be exterminated, OT and NT they will be redeemed.

Hmmm.... doesn't the bible teach that 2/3rd of Israel will be annihilated... and only a remnant will be saved?

Guess what.... the Koran also teaches that a remnant of Jews would be saved.

Both OT and NT establish the identity of God, Quran? God has no name, he has a title for a name.

So, was Jesus calling God by a title, when he was nailed to the cross?

"Eloi" sounds a whole lot similar to "Allah".

OT and NT his name is to be proclaimed to all the world. Quran, well you can't proclaim what was never given. Who are the people of the book?

"his name is to be proclaimed to all the world"

Whos name? Jesus' name? Or the name of God who sent Jesus?
No wait, you believe Jesus is YHWH. I know some other Christians who believe Jesus is NOT YHWH.

Who am I to believe?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
For example, the phrase "Let us create" and the three men who visited Abraham in Genesis... magically becomes evidence for the trinity. Forget the fact that God, who Himself spoke in the OT, never said he was triune.

Well, logically, when did he say that he wasn't?

Who am I to believe?

Believe what feels right to you, pal. That's what it's all about, and tell anyone who tells you otherwise to get bent.

reply to post by adjensen

Well, logically, when did he say that he wasn't?

He didn't.
However, He stated that He is God and there is none like Him.
Jesus also taught that God is one.....

Believe what feels right to you, pal. That's what it's all about, and tell anyone who tells you otherwise to get bent.

Don't we all believe what feels right to us?
My point is, there is no one set of views to represent Christianity. Christians are divided on many matters.

If I want a christian opinion, which group do I ask? The catholics? the protestants? Which one?