Does the Bible mention Islam?

[shmogie]

A man may call himself a fence post, that doesn't make him one. A man may call himself a Christian, that doesn't make him one.

Christ said their were two paths, one broad, for many to take, that leads to disaster, one narrow and difficult, that leads to salvation

This not only applies to the world, it applies to Christianity.

The very spiritual entity that stalks with mirages the world, stalks Christianity. We are told in The Bible that this was occurring in the early days of the faith.

Sadly, it appears that the majority of Christians may have succumbed to the false illusions.

Christ said " by their fruit you shall know them ". You cannot judge a set of faith principles by those that allege they keep them. You can only judge yourself in relation to those faith principles.

Thus you see those that say they are followers of the true religion of peace, being violent and vicious.

God cherishes his children choosing to love and follow him based on total and complete free will. Compulsion of any kind is anathema to him. Thus, the only responsibility of a Christian is to see that others of Gods children know the truth and can make an informed choice. The choice, and the results are between they, and God. Any compulsion, by violence or otherwise us not of God, and thus is not of Christ.

Peace

I couldn't agree more.

Muhammad taught let there be no compulsion in religion.

Al-Baqara 256 - Wikipedia

Really ? Do the acts of the armyś under his command bear that out ? What was his response, if any, if in fact, people were executed for not converting ?

I really didn´t answer you OP directly, but digressed. The Bible addressed Mohammed directly/indirectly, by clearly identifying who true prophets are, and are not. He is not.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Really ? Do the acts of the armyś under his command bear that out ? What was his response, if any, if in fact, people were executed for not converting ?

I really didn´t answer you OP directly, but digressed. The Bible addressed Mohammed directly/indirectly, by clearly identifying who true prophets are, and are not. He is not.

By that Biblical standard, Muhammad passes to be true.

If you are accusing Muhammad as false, then did you judge Muhammad by some of those that called themselves Muslims, or by the word and standard of Muhammad?

Is that how we would Judge Jesus, by the followers?

Regards Tony

 

[shmogie]

By that Biblical standard, Muhammad passes to be true.

If you are accusinguhammad as false, then did you judge Muhammad by some of those that called themselves Muslims, or by the word and standardof.Muhammad?

Is that how we would Judge Jesus, by the followers?

Regards Tony

I didn´t make an accusation, I asked if it happened, what was his response, if any.

Sorry but the age of prophets ended with John the Baptist. There have been no prophets since. They guided Israel, which ended in 70AD, and more importantly, they pointed to the Messiah, whom Jesus was. The Apostles never called themselves Prophets.

I have read some very interesting suras from the Koran that certainly lead me to believe they endorse violence against non believers. I will look them up, and share them with you, I would like to hear your comments on them.

 

[Shia Islam]

Do you have proof for this?

Since you have a specific meaning of the word "scribes" let me restate this point as follows:
The scriptures we are talking about have been changed and distorted.

Now, since you have raised the question, please excuse me to use a very open and unambiguous language:

This topic of distortion is a very big topic. So let me only say this:

Do you believe what the Christian's bible is saying about the Israelites and Jews and their Deeds?!

Then similarly the Christians have their say about your scriptures too.

Let me stop here..

 

[Shia Islam]

There is a difference in reading and studying and reciting and being a cassette recorder right?

God and Muhammad told us in the Quran that the people of the Gospel should Judge with the Gospel. Read 5:47. God and Muhammad told us in the Quran that the people of the Book should uphold the Tora and the Gospel, else they are on nothing. Read 5:68.
God and Muhammad told us to believe in the Books and the Prophets. Read 2:285.

This whole anti-Bible movement is just a political agenda. The Quran is pro-Bible. And i am talking about the Greek and Hebrew Bible, not the translations.

Islam is the final religion of God, and Islam is calling the followers of the other Abrahamic religions to follow the Quran.

There is a difference between recognizing Christianity and Judaism as two religions which have been revealed by God, and saying that these religions have not been distorted..

Of course following the bible is better than not following any Abrahamic scripture, and this may explain the fact that in Islam the Jews and the Christians have established strong existence within the Islamic Caliphate..

Moreover, at some point in history, the majority of the citizens within the Muslim Caliphate were following other Abrahamic religion than Islam...The Umayyad and the Abbasid armies had big percentage of non-Muslim soldiers. The mass conversion to Islam happened later in history.

 

[Tumah]

We all need to assess our personal relationship with G-d. I don't see why G-d requires anyone to follow a set of laws in its entirety He revealed 3 1/2 thousand years ago. The historic circumstances that made those laws entirely applicable, have passed.

I understand that this is your opinion and perhaps part of the reason why you chose your present religion.

I don't see why eg. celebrating Passover, a commemoration of G-d's redemption of my forefathers from Egypt should no longer be relevant. Did the statute of limitations on how long I may show appreciation for the incredible things G-d has done for my nation, ran out?

And the G-d Himself seems to disagree with you. How many verses are there that speak about the eternality of the Covenant and of G-d's Law? Lots.

What reformist Judaism says makes sense.

For Reform, the Torah is the God-inspired attempt by Hebrews/Israelites/ Jews to understand their surroundings and their relationship with God. While it is a holy document, the Torah is rooted in the past, and we can even sometimes discern the circumstances under which certain sections were written down. Reform thus sees development in Judaism, not just through the biblical period but thereafter as well, so that we can continue the process of helping Judaism evolve by coming to our own understandings. We also recognize that Jews in various places developed varying customs and understandings, again proof to us that Judaism is not and never was monolithic. When Reform Jews relate to God, they do so on a more personal and less mechanistic level than one would through halachah, though I must add that I am sure that many Orthodox Jews also have a very "personal" relationship with God, and many Reform Jews do feel that God demands certain behavior of them. The fact is, Judaism has never really imposed a "belief" on people, though obviously the halachah system implies a specific understanding of God.

What is the most fundamental difference between Reform Judaism and Orthodox Judaism?

Reform Judaism's stance came about in a somewhat similar way to your own. Because of the Jewish Emancipation in Europe, many, many Jews attempted to assimilate into German (and other countries, but that's where it started and the worst of it) culture. Some left entirely and some took a more Hellenistic approach, trying to combine Judaism with German culture "A Jew in the home, a gentile on the street". Within the new Reform denomination, some thought they assimilated too much and moved back to the right somewhat, creating the Conservative denomination. What their stances were not based on, is the Torah. So, as I would ask you: if the Torah does not allow for this, on whose authority do I have to not follow it?

Also that last sentence is obviously wrong. The Torah quite clearly requires certain beliefs, the Talmud has plenty of statements about heretics and Maimonides is not the only Rabbi who attempted to codify our required beliefs.

While learning from the mistakes of our ancestors we also need to recognise those mistakes of our ancestors are not necessarily the main issue now. If you have a framework of worshipping G-d and living a moral life (not necessarily to the letter of the law in the Torah) why wouldn't that be sufficient?

Undoubtedly. Until the Second Temple era, idolatry was the major problem. Towards the end of the Second Temple era, unity was. Every generation has it's own issues - or I should say, it's own particular set of commandments, that it has trouble fulfilling. That has not changed today. I don't see at all what particular modern circumstances should require us to abrogate G-d's Law.

The life that you speak about, yes, G-d requires that of the gentiles - we call that the Noahide Law. Believe in G-d to the exclusion of false-gods and live in peace with your fellow. That was the covenant that G-d made with Noah. But after that, G-d made a different covenant with the Jewish people, that requires more than that. So for the gentile, you're right. For the Jew, you are not.

Like most people in the world, I don't speak Hebrew. I rely on good English translations so the I see nothing that says the law has to be exactly the same in the New Covenant. If you can provide an established and reputable English translation that is acceptable to us both, we can pursue this further.

Young's Literal. It's a little bit hard to get an idea of what's going on because they use perfective and imperfective instead of past and future, which makes reading it somewhat difficult to tell when something is going to happen. Read it in the context and you'll get a better picture. Here it is:

I have given My law in their inward part, And on their heart I do write it

I think we need to see bigger picture. There are distinct historic periods, pre-exile, exile, post exile/second temple, diaspora, and Israel re-established. If the first exile period represented G-d's chastisement, then what did the diaspora represent? Why did it happen despite G-d's promises to protect Israel? Despite the restoration of the temple and Jerusalem my humble reading of the Tanakh is G-d had the Hebrew people on final notice. So the issue might be interpreting history in light of what was revealed by G-d in the Torah.

We can fix this, by altering the names of your labels: Egyptian exile, Egyptian Redemptian- First Temple era, Babylonian Exile, Second Temple era, Greek/Roman exile to the present day.

G-d's promise to protect us is contingent on whether we, as a nation, follow G-d's Law.

There is no final notice, because the covenant is exactly the previous: when we follow G-d's Law, we see success, when we don't, we don't. That has never changed.

G-d can not be rendered impotent by any man. We can all misinterpret history as we misinterpret the sacred writings. We can all fail to read the reality of our own lives in a modern context.

That means, that if you're reading renders G-d impotent, than your reading is wrong. Unless you have a position that circumvents this problem?

How do you account for the diaspora btw?

We call it the fourth exile. Same thing as all the others, when we don't listen to G-d, that's what we get. It's already been laid out in Deut. 28.

I wasn't, but now you mention it, I'm curious. How do you view reform Judaism?

How can I view any form of Judaism that doesn't abide by G-d's Law positively?

I had meant how do you convince your people that orthodox Judaism is the best path for Israel and the Jewish people.

It doesn't take convincing. The Torah says that G-d's Law is forever, so it's forever. There's no reason to assume that has changed and nothing in present-day that suggests so.

I know you are not trying to convince me to follow Judaism and I hope you don't think I'm try to convince you to become a Christian, Muslim or Baha'i.

I know, it's about uniting the different religions under Baha'i leadership.

I do see similar trends in Judaism as I do Christianity...

1/ Orthodoxy/fundamentalism
2/ Reform
3/ Secularisation.

How about you?

I Western culture is synonymous with lower birth rates, excepting for fundamentalists. I'm not sure how that plays out on a national level for other religions/irreligious. For Judaism, between heightened assimilation rates and low birth rates, it looks like Orthodoxy will be the face of the nation soon. It's terrible to lose such a huge percentage of the nation, but unfortunately that's what may be required until the "nation" consists mostly of people who follow G-d's Law, so that we may merit the final Redemption from this Exile.

 

[Tumah]

Since you have a specific meaning of the word "scribes" let me restate this point as follows:
The scriptures we are talking about have been changed and distorted.

Now, since you have raised the question, please excuse me to use a very open and unambiguous language:

This topic of distortion is a very big topic. So let me only say this:

Do you believe what the Christian's bible is saying about the Israelites and Jews and their Deeds?!

Then similarly the Christians have their say about your scriptures too.

Let me stop here..

The Christians do not claim that the Tanach has been changed. They interpret it differently, based on teachings in their Bible, rather than the context of the Tanach. That is not the same as saying that the words of the Tanach are different than what they originally were, which seems to be the claim that you are making.

I am happy to discuss this with you, even without ambiguous language.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Really ? Do the acts of the armyś under his command bear that out ? What was his response, if any, if in fact, people were executed for not converting ?

I really didn´t answer you OP directly, but digressed. The Bible addressed Mohammed directly/indirectly, by clearly identifying who true prophets are, and are not. He is not.

So how do we establish a true prophet? He would speak in G-d’s name; the things foretold would come to pass (Deuteronomy 18:20-22); what He teaches must be in harmony with G-d’s commandments (Deuteronomy 13:1-4). and a true prophet must bear good fruit (Matthew 7:17-20). It is a test from G-d for each of us to judge fairly (Matthew 7:1-4).

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I didn´t make an accusation, I asked if it happened, what was his response, if any.

Sorry but the age of prophets ended with John the Baptist. There have been no prophets since. They guided Israel, which ended in 70AD, and more importantly, they pointed to the Messiah, whom Jesus was. The Apostles never called themselves Prophets.

I have read some very interesting suras from the Koran that certainly lead me to believe they endorse violence against non believers. I will look them up, and share them with you, I would like to hear your comments on them.

I wonder how many time in history people of said that Revelation ended with a certain Prophet. The Jews, Christian and Muslims all say this.

Meanwhile, God sends His Messengers and to me it is not difficult to see what were Messages from God by the influence they have had. An offshoot of a Religion can not be seen as another revelation.

Regards Tony

 

[Dawnofhope]

I understand that this is your opinion and perhaps part of the reason why you chose your present religion.

I don't see why eg. celebrating Passover, a commemoration of G-d's redemption of my forefathers from Egypt should no longer be relevant. Did the statute of limitations on how long I may show appreciation for the incredible things G-d has done for my nation, ran out?

And the G-d Himself seems to disagree with you. How many verses are there that speak about the eternality of the Covenant and of G-d's Law? Lots.

I see G-d's Covenant as eternal, too. Basically He blesses us if we follow Him and all His prophets. If we don't then His Blessings can not reach us. I see Christianity, Islam and more recently the Baha'i Faith all as New Covenants with new laws and requirements that make sense for a dispensation or age.

I honestly don't see how you can apply the 613 mitzvot for the modern era though many of the laws are universal and applicable for any age.

But that is fine because we both have our sincere belief.

Undoubtedly. Until the Second Temple era, idolatry was the major problem. Towards the end of the Second Temple era, unity was. Every generation has it's own issues - or I should say, it's own particular set of commandments, that it has trouble fulfilling. That has not changed today. I don't see at all what particular modern circumstances should require us to abrogate G-d's Law.

The life that you speak about, yes, G-d requires that of the gentiles - we call that the Noahide Law. Believe in G-d to the exclusion of false-gods and live in peace with your fellow. That was the covenant that G-d made with Noah. But after that, G-d made a different covenant with the Jewish people, that requires more than that. So for the gentile, you're right. For the Jew, you are not.

If worshiping the G-d of Abraham alone and being at peace with others is all thats required then I'm good with that. G-d requires more of me IMHO.

Young's Literal. It's a little bit hard to get an idea of what's going on because they use perfective and imperfective instead of past and future, which makes reading it somewhat difficult to tell when something is going to happen. Read it in the context and you'll get a better picture. Here it is:

I have given My law in their inward part, And on their heart I do write it

There is certainly room for different perspectives on that verse alone, but I can see how you would see it as unchanging.

We can fix this, by altering the names of your labels: Egyptian exile, Egyptian Redemptian- First Temple era, Babylonian Exile, Second Temple era, Greek/Roman exile to the present day.

G-d's promise to protect us is contingent on whether we, as a nation, follow G-d's Law.

That's useful to have the proper terms.

There is no final notice, because the covenant is exactly the previous: when we follow G-d's Law, we see success, when we don't, we don't. That has never changed.

That means, that if you're reading renders G-d impotent, than your reading is wrong. Unless you have a position that circumvents this problem?

So G-d couldn't reveal Himself through an Arab, Indian, or Persian. G-d couldn't change His own laws?

We call it the fourth exile. Same thing as all the others, when we don't listen to G-d, that's what we get. It's already been laid out in Deut. 28.

Its great you have the nation of Israel again. The Baha'is are grateful to Israel for allowing us access to our Shrines and sacred sites.

How can I view any form of Judaism that doesn't abide by G-d's Law positively?

So I imagine unity is still an issue between the orthodox, reformist, and secular Jews.

It doesn't take convincing. The Torah says that G-d's Law is forever, so it's forever. There's no reason to assume that has changed and nothing in present-day that suggests so.

I know, it's about uniting the different religions under Baha'i leadership.

That's not how I see the future unfolding according to the Baha'i writings. Baha'is are required to associate with all peoples in a spirit of love and fellowship. Clearly we see Torah as sacred as we do the Gospels and Quran. Whether or not the Baha'i writings are from G-d, time will tell.

I Western culture is synonymous with lower birth rates, excepting for fundamentalists. I'm not sure how that plays out on a national level for other religions/irreligious. For Judaism, between heightened assimilation rates and low birth rates, it looks like Orthodoxy will be the face of the nation soon. It's terrible to lose such a huge percentage of the nation, but unfortunately that's what may be required until the "nation" consists mostly of people who follow G-d's Law, so that we may merit the final Redemption from this Exile.

Whether or not G-d blesses the vision orthodox Jews have for Israel will become apparent too.

I do appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions about your faith and the history of your people.

 

[W3bcrowf3r]

Islam is the final religion of God, and Islam is calling the followers of the other Abrahamic religions to follow the Quran.

There is a difference between recognizing Christianity and Judaism as two religions which have been revealed by God, and saying that these religions have not been distorted..

Of course following the bible is better than not following any Abrahamic scripture, and this may explain the fact that in Islam the Jews and the Christians have established strong existence within the Islamic Caliphate..

Moreover, at some point in history, the majority of the citizens within the Muslim Caliphate were following other Abrahamic religion than Islam...The Umayyad and the Abbasid armies had big percentage of non-Muslim soldiers. The mass conversion to Islam happened later in history.

The narrations contradict the Quran, Gospel, Psalms and Tora. I don't believe in the narrations which are being uphold besides the Quran. Both Shia and Sunni have their own version of Muhammad, and i believe neither of them is on the Truth. The Sunni version was invented by the Arabs who were worshipping Idols before Muhammad, and the Shia version is just a Persian copy of the Sunni version with additions.

The Quran clearly told the people of the Book to uphold the Tora and the Gospel, read 5:68. And read 5:47, it told the people of the Gospel to Judge with the Gospel.

 

[Tumah]

I see G-d's Covenant as eternal, too. Basically He blesses us if we follow Him and all His prophets. If we don't then His Blessings can not reach us. I see Christianity, Islam and more recently the Baha'i Faith all as New Covenants with new laws and requirements that make sense for a dispensation or age.

Deut. 29:28 "...and the revealed [things are] for us and our children forever to do all the things of this Torah".

I honestly don't see how you can apply the 613 mitzvot for the modern era though many of the laws are universal and applicable for any age.

Many of the 613 Laws are not applicable simply because they are situational and those conditions are not met today. But I'd like to hear about some commandments that we perform today, that you believe is not applicable for the modern era.

If worshiping the G-d of Abraham alone and being at peace with others is all thats required then I'm good with that. G-d requires more of me IMHO.

That's not what you said earlier.

There is certainly room for different perspectives on that verse alone, but I can see how you would see it as unchanging.

I'm listening.

That's useful to have the proper terms.

The point of the terms is to put the matter into the right perspective. You call it a diaspora, but what it really is, is an exile. Actually, our commentaries see the image of Daniel 2 as a reference to these: The gold is the Babylonians, the silver Persia/Media, the copper Greece. And the legs of iron that become iron and clay is the last exile, the Roman exile that turned into a double exile, one under the West and one under the East.

So G-d couldn't reveal Himself through an Arab, Indian, or Persian. G-d couldn't change His own laws?

Absolutely not. G-d is unchanging and He said that His Laws are eternal. How could He contradict Himself?

So I imagine unity is still an issue between the orthodox, reformist, and secular Jews.

It depends in what. When it comes to religious issues, obviously not. When it comes to national issues, like for instance the recent Pittsburgh shooting, there's plenty of unity.

That's not how I see the future unfolding according to the Baha'i writings. Baha'is are required to associate with all peoples in a spirit of love and fellowship. Clearly we see Torah as sacred as we do the Gospels and Quran. Whether or not the Baha'i writings are from G-d, time will tell.

So have I got this wrong?

Whether or not G-d blesses the vision orthodox Jews have for Israel will become apparent too.

Yes.

 

[Faithofchristian]

A Baha'i exegesis is the beast refers to militant Islam or more specifically the Umayyad dynasty that started 661 AD and lasted until 750 AD..

Umayyad Caliphate - Wikipedia

This resulted in the rapid spread of Islam throughout the Middle East, into Palestine, Africa, Europe and Asia.

The number 666 refers to this dynasty and this number is mentioned just once on the book of Revelation 13:18. As Christ was thought to be born sometime between 4 - 6 BC then the length of time elapsed from
His birth to the start of this empire is 666 years.

Revelation 12:3-4 reads “And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth.”

These signs are an allusion to the dynasty of the Umayyads who dominated the Muḥammadan religion. Seven heads and seven crowns mean seven countries and dominions over which the Umayyads had power: they were the Roman dominion around Damascus; and the Persian, Arabian and Egyptian dominions, together with the dominion of Africa—that is to say, Tunis, Morocco and Algeria; the dominion of Andalusia, which is now Spain; and the dominion of the Turks of Transoxania. The Umayyads had power over these countries. The ten horns mean the names of the Umayyad rulers—that is, without repetition, there were ten names of rulers, meaning ten names of commanders and chiefs—the first is Abú Súfyán and the last Marván—but several of them bear the same name. So there are two Muáviyá, three Yazíd, two Valíd, and two Marván; but if the names were counted without repetition 70 there would be ten. The Umayyads, of whom the first was Abú Súfyán, Amír of Mecca and chief of the dynasty of the Umayyads, and the last was Marván, destroyed the third part of the holy and saintly people of the lineage of Muḥammad who were like the stars of heaven.

Bahá'í Reference Library - Some Answered Questions, Pages 67-72

You said ( The number 666 refers to this dynasty and this number is mentioned just once on the book of Revelation 13:18)

The number 666 is mention three times in the book of Revelation. If you put together all about the seal, trumpet and Vial, in Revelation. What and who the seals, trumpets and Vails all represents and who.

In the book of Revelation who will find
7 seals, 7 trumpets, 7 Vials.

The 6th seal, 6th trumpet, 6th vial, adds up to the number 666, which is the number of Satan.
The 7th seal, 7th trumpet, 7th vial, adds up to the number 777 which represents Christ Jesus. 777 is the number of completion, completeness. God's Holy number of Completion, Completeness.

You said--->( Revelation 12:3-4 reads “And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth.”)

Notice ( And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth)

What are these Stars according to the book of Revelation.

In Revelation 1:20 We find the stars representing Angels of heaven.
Revelation 1:20---"The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches)

 

[shmogie]

So how do we establish a true prophet? He would speak in G-d’s name; the things foretold would come to pass (Deuteronomy 18:20-22); what He teaches must be in harmony with G-d’s commandments (Deuteronomy 13:1-4). and a true prophet must bear good fruit (Matthew 7:17-20). It is a test from G-d for each of us to judge fairly (Matthew 7:1-4).

What is Gods name according to the scriptures you quote ? YHWH, NOT Allah. Therefore these scriptures cannot apply to any other god.

 

[BilliardsBall]

There's nothing oblique about it. In a Hadith there are 99 attributes of G-d. All these attributes can be linked to the G-d of Abraham in the Bible.

Names of God in Islam - Wikipedia

Then why isn't a single name for Allah in Islam, "LOVE". Both testaments teach the love of God.

...Then why does the Qu'ran say, "God forbid that God has a Son" and Jesus said in the Bible, "God have His unique Son to save the world..."

 

[shmogie]

I wonder how many time in history people of said that Revelation ended with a certain Prophet. The Jews, Christian and Muslims all say this.

Meanwhile, God sends His Messengers and to me it is not difficult to see what were Messages from God by the influence they have had. An offshoot of a Religion can not be seen as another revelation.

Regards Tony

Interesting perspective. Yet aren't the influences you appreciate, and those you don't, based upon your personal bias of what is good or bad ? After all, hitler loved dogs
and made the trains run on time.

 

[shmogie]

I understand that this is your opinion and perhaps part of the reason why you chose your present religion.

I don't see why eg. celebrating Passover, a commemoration of G-d's redemption of my forefathers from Egypt should no longer be relevant. Did the statute of limitations on how long I may show appreciation for the incredible things G-d has done for my nation, ran out?

And the G-d Himself seems to disagree with you. How many verses are there that speak about the eternality of the Covenant and of G-d's Law? Lots.


Reform Judaism's stance came about in a somewhat similar way to your own. Because of the Jewish Emancipation in Europe, many, many Jews attempted to assimilate into German (and other countries, but that's where it started and the worst of it) culture. Some left entirely and some took a more Hellenistic approach, trying to combine Judaism with German culture "A Jew in the home, a gentile on the street". Within the new Reform denomination, some thought they assimilated too much and moved back to the right somewhat, creating the Conservative denomination. What their stances were not based on, is the Torah. So, as I would ask you: if the Torah does not allow for this, on whose authority do I have to not follow it?

Also that last sentence is obviously wrong. The Torah quite clearly requires certain beliefs, the Talmud has plenty of statements about heretics and Maimonides is not the only Rabbi who attempted to codify our required beliefs.


Undoubtedly. Until the Second Temple era, idolatry was the major problem. Towards the end of the Second Temple era, unity was. Every generation has it's own issues - or I should say, it's own particular set of commandments, that it has trouble fulfilling. That has not changed today. I don't see at all what particular modern circumstances should require us to abrogate G-d's Law.

The life that you speak about, yes, G-d requires that of the gentiles - we call that the Noahide Law. Believe in G-d to the exclusion of false-gods and live in peace with your fellow. That was the covenant that G-d made with Noah. But after that, G-d made a different covenant with the Jewish people, that requires more than that. So for the gentile, you're right. For the Jew, you are not.



Young's Literal. It's a little bit hard to get an idea of what's going on because they use perfective and imperfective instead of past and future, which makes reading it somewhat difficult to tell when something is going to happen. Read it in the context and you'll get a better picture. Here it is:

I have given My law in their inward part, And on their heart I do write it



We can fix this, by altering the names of your labels: Egyptian exile, Egyptian Redemptian- First Temple era, Babylonian Exile, Second Temple era, Greek/Roman exile to the present day.

G-d's promise to protect us is contingent on whether we, as a nation, follow G-d's Law.

There is no final notice, because the covenant is exactly the previous: when we follow G-d's Law, we see success, when we don't, we don't. That has never changed.




That means, that if you're reading renders G-d impotent, than your reading is wrong. Unless you have a position that circumvents this problem?


We call it the fourth exile. Same thing as all the others, when we don't listen to G-d, that's what we get. It's already been laid out in Deut. 28.


How can I view any form of Judaism that doesn't abide by G-d's Law positively?


It doesn't take convincing. The Torah says that G-d's Law is forever, so it's forever. There's no reason to assume that has changed and nothing in present-day that suggests so.


I know, it's about uniting the different religions under Baha'i leadership.


I Western culture is synonymous with lower birth rates, excepting for fundamentalists. I'm not sure how that plays out on a national level for other religions/irreligious. For Judaism, between heightened assimilation rates and low birth rates, it looks like Orthodoxy will be the face of the nation soon. It's terrible to lose such a huge percentage of the nation, but unfortunately that's what may be required until the "nation" consists mostly of people who follow G-d's Law, so that we may merit the final Redemption from this Exile.

Very well written. Clearly showing the Jewish relationship to God, and the meaning of the first covenant to Israel.

For another time, but a second, better covenant came to Israel from God, one that more Jews are beginning to recognize. Since Jews are the chosen of God, there will be a time when they accept the Messiah, and the second covenant.

 

[W3bcrowf3r]

Then why isn't a single name for Allah in Islam, "LOVE". Both testaments teach the love of God.

...Then why does the Qu'ran say, "God forbid that God has a Son" and Jesus said in the Bible, "God have His unique Son to save the world..."

If you don't know Arabic and Greek, then i wouldn't dare to begin with this topic if i was you. You do not want to base your claims on sectarian translations.

In Arabic there are three words for son, there is ghulaam, welled, and ibn. The Quran warns against calling Jesus Christ te literal son of God. There is nothing wrong in calling Christ a spiritual son of God. The Quran even used the term 'children of God'. And the point is, not only Christ can be called a son of God, so can the righteouss be as well, but i agree that he is an unique one, since he is Christ, and we humans received many prophets, but just one Christ.

But you are probably smart enough to study Greek and read the original Gospel. And if you want to claim what the Quran really says, then it would be wise to study Arabic.
A golden advice is, never trust a translation. One, you are just reading what the translator understood, and two, they have errors in them.

Anyways, the Quran in 5:47 told us to Judge with the Gospel. And the Quran in 5:68 told us to uphold the Tora and the Gospel, else we are on nothing.
So stay away from these discussions if you do not know Greek and Arabic.

 

[Tumah]

For another time, but a second, better covenant came to Israel from God, one that more Jews are beginning to recognize. Since Jews are the chosen of God, there will be a time when they accept the Messiah, and the second covenant.

I think you mean a third covenant, because there was already one on Mt. Horeb and one in Moab. But no, the third covenant is demonstrably not yet been made as we can see in the world around us.

 

[shmogie]

Since you have a specific meaning of the word "scribes" let me restate this point as follows:
The scriptures we are talking about have been changed and distorted.

Now, since you have raised the question, please excuse me to use a very open and unambiguous language:

This topic of distortion is a very big topic. So let me only say this:

Do you believe what the Christian's bible is saying about the Israelites and Jews and their Deeds?!

Then similarly the Christians have their say about your scriptures too.

Let me stop here..

Christians emphatically accept the Jewish scriptures, i.e. the Old Testament, exactly as written.

Since the OT has been consistent for 3,000 years, and Islam didn't appear till 600 years after Christianity, I know where the distortion came from.