The prophets tell us that THE SCRIBES HAD CHANGED THE GOD'S LAW

[Sabour]

How do you mean, "changing the law".

Differences in different versions just shows different realities of Self. All things are real, all things exist somewhere. All that is destroyed is that which is unclean, like a forgotten thought. But each thought gives rise to another, does it not.

As for the explanation, dwell on it, it is not something you are likely to hear elsewhere.

I have a great deal of respect for Muslims, if you believed in the crucifixion and resurrection, I guess I would be knocking on your Temple door

Well about the crucifixion Quraan is clear on that that Jesus peace be upon him was not crucified. About the resurrection, I would have to know your complete views about that from A to Z to tell you.

Here is an example on how things may differ between one version and another.

the major two concepts there is a need to discuss about are "trinity" and "begotten son". Well these two concepts are only established by taking verses out of context. You will not find in the bible somewhere Jesus explicitly saying that he is god. On the other hand you will find him explicitly stating that he is not god. One explicit statement overwrites 10000 implicit statements for all implicit statements are taken out of context.

The only verse indicating trinity (the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one) has been removed from the bible by 32 scholars of the bible in the Revised Standard Version among many other verses as fabrication after they realized that these verses do not exist in the most ancient manuscript and as such there is not a single verse indicating Trinity anymore in the complete bible.


John A-V {5:7} For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (This verse does not exist anymore in the RSV)



The fabrication of the Begotten Son

The word begotten has been removed from all Gospels by the same bible scholars as fabrication after they realized that this word does not exist in the most ancient manuscript.

John A-V {3:16} For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (This word does not exist anymore in all Gospels in the RSV), so Jesus is not begotten by God where we find others still alleged to be begotten sons of God according to the bible. examples:

(if the word son, means begotten son )

David was a begotten son of God long before Jesus (according to the bible). Psalms A-V {2:7} I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Israel was a begotten son of God long before Jesus (according to the bible). Exodus A-V {4:22} And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel[is] my son, [even] my firstborn:

So the term Son of God in the language of the Jews means godly person not actual son of God and does not mean divinity at all, examples:

All Jews are sons of God (according to the bible). Psalms A-V {82:6} I have said, Ye [are] gods; and all of you [are] children of the most High.

All those who follow the spirit of God are sons of God (according to the bible). Romans A-V {8:14} For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

These changes in these two concepts change everything about Jesus peace be upon him teaching.


Nothing makes me more happy than hearing that someone would consider Islam, but we have to present Islam to you the way it is. If you are up for it, I wish you go through my thread http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/163199-jesus-jesus.html

 

[Robert.Evans]

Well about the crucifixion Quraan is clear on that that Jesus peace be upon him was not crucified. About the resurrection, I would have to know your complete views about that from A to Z to tell you.

Here is an example on how things may differ between one version and another.

the major two concepts there is a need to discuss about are "trinity" and "begotten son". Well these two concepts are only established by taking verses out of context. You will not find in the bible somewhere Jesus explicitly saying that he is god. On the other hand you will find him explicitly stating that he is not god. One explicit statement overwrites 10000 implicit statements for all implicit statements are taken out of context.

The only verse indicating trinity (the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one) has been removed from the bible by 32 scholars of the bible in the Revised Standard Version among many other verses as fabrication after they realized that these verses do not exist in the most ancient manuscript and as such there is not a single verse indicating Trinity anymore in the complete bible.


John A-V {5:7} For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (This verse does not exist anymore in the RSV)



The fabrication of the Begotten Son

The word begotten has been removed from all Gospels by the same bible scholars as fabrication after they realized that this word does not exist in the most ancient manuscript.

John A-V {3:16} For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (This word does not exist anymore in all Gospels in the RSV), so Jesus is not begotten by God where we find others still alleged to be begotten sons of God according to the bible. examples:

(if the word son, means begotten son )

David was a begotten son of God long before Jesus (according to the bible). Psalms A-V {2:7} I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Israel was a begotten son of God long before Jesus (according to the bible). Exodus A-V {4:22} And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel[is] my son, [even] my firstborn:

So the term Son of God in the language of the Jews means godly person not actual son of God and does not mean divinity at all, examples:

All Jews are sons of God (according to the bible). Psalms A-V {82:6} I have said, Ye [are] gods; and all of you [are] children of the most High.

All those who follow the spirit of God are sons of God (according to the bible). Romans A-V {8:14} For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

These changes in these two concepts change everything about Jesus peace be upon him teaching.


Nothing makes me more happy than hearing that someone would consider Islam, but we have to present Islam to you the way it is. If you are up for it, I wish you go through my thread http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/163199-jesus-jesus.html

It is interesting that it is not in the RSV gospels yet it is still there in three places:

Acts 13:33 RSV
this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.'

Hebrews 1:5 RSV
For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"?

Hebrews 5:5 RSV
So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee";

So what do we do with those, ignore them.

As for the Trinity, what of Hebrews 1.8 where he is called God, do we ignore that. Where does it stop?

 

[Sabour]

It is interesting that it is not in the RSV gospels yet it is still there in three places:

Acts 13:33 RSV
this he has fulfilled to us their children by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee.'

Hebrews 1:5 RSV
For to what angel did God ever say, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"?

Hebrews 5:5 RSV
So also Christ did not exalt himself to be made a high priest, but was appointed by him who said to him, "Thou art my Son, today I have begotten thee";

So what do we do with those, ignore them.

As for the Trinity, what of Hebrews 1.8 where he is called God, do we ignore that. Where does it stop?

I was just showing an example of what happens. I didn't say that those are all.

 

[metis]

This is off a site:

Has seen
(Gen. 17:1)--“Now when Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, "I am God Almighty; Walk before Me, and be blameless;
(Gen. 18:1) Now the LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day.”
(Exodus 6:2-3)--"God spoke further to Moses and said to him, "I am the LORD; 3and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name, LORD, I did not make Myself known to them.”
(Exodus 24:9-11)--“Then Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, 10and they saw the God of Israel; and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they saw God, and they ate and drank.”
(Num. 12:6-8)--“He said, "Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. 7"Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; 8With him I speak mouth to mouth, Even openly, and not in dark sayings, And he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid To speak against My servant, against Moses ?"
(Acts 7:2), "And he [Stephen] said, 'Hear me, brethren and fathers! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran . . . '"


Has not seen

(Exodus 33:20)--“But He [God] said, "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!"
(John 1:18)--“No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”
(John 5:37)--“"And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form.”
(John 6:46)--"Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.”
(1 Tim. 6:15-16)--“He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.”


There are two lists. One says "under his feet"

None of these verses have it that any of them saw God's face, but sometimes God took a different form, such as the burning bush and the wind.

 

[Robert.Evans]

None of these verses have it that any of them saw God's face, but sometimes God took a different form, such as the burning bush and the wind.

They "saw God" it says. Do I have to see your face to have seen you? Of course if this was a man then it would make sense. Hence they could eat with him. God in most of those cases was elohiym anyway, so plural, so more than one, even if changed later. How do you answer that?

 

[Robert.Evans]

I was just showing an example of what happens. I didn't say that those are all.

Ok, but if Yahshuah is not God, then what would you say of Hebrews 1.8. That is what a Trinitarian would say. There is more than just the gospels.

And if he is still called in three places 'begotten' then what of that?

 

[CMike]

They never saw G-d.

As was stated he saw signs of G-d such as a burning bush.

I stated the passages that G-d can not be seen.

G-d has no physical manifestations.

 

[metis]

They "saw God" it says. Do I have to see your face to have seen you? Of course if this was a man then it would make sense. Hence they could eat with him. God in most of those cases was elohiym anyway, so plural, so more than one, even if changed later. How do you answer that?

But you're making the assumption that Jesus was God. As far as "Eloheim" is concerned, the adjectives that relate to that are singular, plus one of the interpretations is that it relates to God along with the angels.

 

[metis]

Ok, but if Yahshuah is not God, then what would you say of Hebrews 1.8. That is what a Trinitarian would say. There is more than just the gospels.

And if he is still called in three places 'begotten' then what of that?

"Hebrews" is not in Torah nor the Tanakh. To me when I read the gospels, I much more get the feeling that the early church didn't believe that Jesus was God but, instead, that Jesus was of God. This especially gets magnified when one reads the gospels and notes that many times Jesus refers to "the Father" in a manner that is different than himself.

 

[Robert.Evans]

They never saw G-d.

As was stated he saw signs of G-d such as a burning bush.

I stated the passages that G-d can not be seen.

G-d has no physical manifestations.

so you ignore this:

Has seen
(Gen. 17:1)--“Now when Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, "I am God Almighty; Walk before Me, and be blameless;
(Gen. 18:1) Now the LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, while he was sitting at the tent door in the heat of the day.”
(Exodus 6:2-3)--"God spoke further to Moses and said to him, "I am the LORD; 3and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name, LORD, I did not make Myself known to them.”
(Exodus 24:9-11)--“Then Moses went up with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, 10and they saw the God of Israel; and under His feet there appeared to be a pavement of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11Yet He did not stretch out His hand against the nobles of the sons of Israel; and they saw God, and they ate and drank.”
(Num. 12:6-8)--“He said, "Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. 7"Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; 8With him I speak mouth to mouth, Even openly, and not in dark sayings, And he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid To speak against My servant, against Moses ?"
(Acts 7:2), "And he [Stephen] said, 'Hear me, brethren and fathers! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran . . . '"

 

[Robert.Evans]

But you're making the assumption that Jesus was God. As far as "Eloheim" is concerned, the adjectives that relate to that are singular, plus one of the interpretations is that it relates to God along with the angels.

That is not an assumption, you sound like an atheist. It is the inner witness which reveals all, and also witnessed Scripture which you ignore. I do not ignore yours.

Elohiym is still a plural word which would suggest strongly what has happened as I have no doubt you have already considered.

 

[Robert.Evans]

"Hebrews" is not in Torah nor the Tanakh. To me when I read the gospels, I much more get the feeling that the early church didn't believe that Jesus was God but, instead, that Jesus was of God. This especially gets magnified when one reads the gospels and notes that many times Jesus refers to "the Father" in a manner that is different than himself.

It is witnessed Scripture, if you ignore that from Yisrael, then are you to ignore it all? There is much that can be discussed as regards Yahshuah and his divinity. But a simple verse like Heb 1.8 has to be answered. If you ignore it, then we can ignore yours. How then do we discuss?

 

[CMike]

It is witnessed Scripture, if you ignore that from Yisrael, then are you to ignore it all? There is much that can be discussed as regards Yahshuah and his divinity. But a simple verse like Heb 1.8 has to be answered. If you ignore it, then we can ignore yours. How then do we discuss?

That's fine. Ignore our G-d. I don't care.

However nothing in Jewish scripture supports that Jesus was any type of God or Messiah

 

[CMike]

It is witnessed Scripture, if you ignore that from Yisrael, then are you to ignore it all? There is much that can be discussed as regards Yahshuah and his divinity. But a simple verse like Heb 1.8 has to be answered. If you ignore it, then we can ignore yours. How then do we discuss?

Well about the crucifixion Quraan is clear on that that Jesus peace be upon him was not crucified. About the resurrection, I would have to know your complete views about that from A to Z to tell you.

Here is an example on how things may differ between one version and another.

the major two concepts there is a need to discuss about are "trinity" and "begotten son". Well these two concepts are only established by taking verses out of context. You will not find in the bible somewhere Jesus explicitly saying that he is god. On the other hand you will find him explicitly stating that he is not god. One explicit statement overwrites 10000 implicit statements for all implicit statements are taken out of context.

The only verse indicating trinity (the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are one) has been removed from the bible by 32 scholars of the bible in the Revised Standard Version among many other verses as fabrication after they realized that these verses do not exist in the most ancient manuscript and as such there is not a single verse indicating Trinity anymore in the complete bible.


John A-V {5:7} For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. (This verse does not exist anymore in the RSV)



The fabrication of the Begotten Son

The word begotten has been removed from all Gospels by the same bible scholars as fabrication after they realized that this word does not exist in the most ancient manuscript.

John A-V {3:16} For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (This word does not exist anymore in all Gospels in the RSV), so Jesus is not begotten by God where we find others still alleged to be begotten sons of God according to the bible. examples:

(if the word son, means begotten son )

David was a begotten son of God long before Jesus (according to the bible). Psalms A-V {2:7} I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

Israel was a begotten son of God long before Jesus (according to the bible). Exodus A-V {4:22} And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel[is] my son, [even] my firstborn:

So the term Son of God in the language of the Jews means godly person not actual son of God and does not mean divinity at all, examples:

All Jews are sons of God (according to the bible). Psalms A-V {82:6} I have said, Ye [are] gods; and all of you [are] children of the most High.

All those who follow the spirit of God are sons of God (according to the bible). Romans A-V {8:14} For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

These changes in these two concepts change everything about Jesus peace be upon him teaching.


Nothing makes me more happy than hearing that someone would consider Islam, but we have to present Islam to you the way it is. If you are up for it, I wish you go through my thread http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/163199-jesus-jesus.html

Excellent points

 

[Robert.Evans]

That's fine. Ignore our G-d. I don't care.

However nothing in Jewish scripture supports that Jesus was any type of God or Messiah

Oh it does, you just don't see it. And I don't ignore your God, they are one of the same

 

[CMike]

Oh it does, you just don't see it. And I don't ignore your God, they are one of the same

If you are believing in another god in any way you are ignoring what the actual G-D said.

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you are believing in another god in any way you are ignoring what the actual G-D said.

But I have just told that I am not, so why say it? But to extend this point, if it is the same God, then did he have a personality change for the NT? How do you explain the difference in 'kill them all' and 'God is love'

 

[paarsurrey]

The prophets tell us that THE SCRIBES HAD CHANGED THE GOD'S LAW


Both the OT and NT has got interfered with by the scribes; hence truthful teachings of Moses and Jesus have been mixed with things not told by them.

Regards

 

[Robert.Evans]

The prophets tell us that THE SCRIBES HAD CHANGED THE GOD'S LAW


Both the OT and NT has got interfered with by the scribes; hence truthful teachings of Moses and Jesus have been mixed with things not told by them.

Regards

That does not make it wrong though, even if that might sound incorrect. it is the finished product that counts, though I take your point

 

[metis]

That is not an assumption, you sound like an atheist. It is the inner witness which reveals all, and also witnessed Scripture which you ignore. I do not ignore yours.

Elohiym is still a plural word which would suggest strongly what has happened as I have no doubt you have already considered.

Why would I "sound like an atheist", which I'm not? If your inner witness tell you something, let me remind you that "inner" may apply to your consideration but maybe not the consideration of many others as interpretation is always variable. The point becomes that "Eloheim" is plural for reasons that are not really abundantly clear, but to assume that it refers to Jesus along with the HS and God is just your interpretation.

But let's look at in another way. Christians often refer to Jesus as "God's only begotten son", or some similar words. OK, if God is the Father and Jesus is the son, then how in the world can father and son be one and the same? I have a son, and he's not exactly the same as I, but he is at least partially of me.

We use different labels to differentiate differences, so "father" and "son" simply cannot be one and the same. The son could be of the father to a certain extent, but they simply cannot logically be one and the same.