Why do Christians accuse other religions of believing in false prophets?

[dybmh]

the only ignorance on display here -- of the first command ---and of the Israelites in general .. cause this is about what they thought .. not what you think .. and of the Bible in general .. YHWH himself believing in Other Gods .. but did not want his people to worship those other Gods --- is yours friend.

They were a mized multitude coming out of egypt. The words meant different things to everyone. And the experience was so intense they said... "Make it stop!!!!" They were expereinceing a REAL god for the first time in their entire lives. a million+ people according to the story.

YHWH did not believe in anything other than "those others are nothing but images carved in rock."

Yes, worshipping images carved in rock is.... stupid after having the experience of the exodus and sinai.

Did you miss the part about YHWH's belief in other Gods .. and the Israelites belief in other Gods .. and YHWH's battles with the other Son's of God.

YHWH states there are to be no other Gods before him .. not that there are no other Gods ..

Yes, it does. It's contained in the word Ahnohchee. Your hyper-literal understanding is failing again. This is almost always what happens. The critic requires a supericial reading of the text, and requires it in english. Cannot escape the hyper-literal...

You would know first hand .. of this truth .. I won't speak for other People. Why do you persist on Ignoring the God of Jesus .. knowing where this path leads.. persist in the heresy told you previously ... which you ignored .. your heretical behavior .. likely forgotten what it is already .. as you did not respond...

Why are you bound to a hyper-literal understanding? Do you ever read poetry? Do you ever look at art?

So yes .. The dark path to disaster .. why do you willfully persist ignoring God .. Disingenuous Oblivion more than Ignorance though ...

It's actually the opposite. The text is being read and undrstood at a higher level than you are doing. That's all.

 

[dybmh]

Yeah Muhamu .. Thats it .. Lets just make stuff up and pretend like that is what the Bible Says .. Yes Exactly

No Muhamu --- that is not the Path to "The Truth - The Way - The Light" .. do not so easy a follower be Friend ..

It's not made up. You are reading in english. It's not as precise as the original. You are repatedly reducing the precision of the text and playing name-games.

And really, I think if we were to examine what youtube channels you are parroting, we'd see that you are the one who is a follower.

 

[Brian2]

??? A redactor would have inserted YHWH unless Ex 6:3 is not the usual translation we have in our English Bibles""???

This does not make any sense. The English Language did not exist in 500BC .. nor an English Bible. His decision to use the Tetragrammon YHWH - in place of some general Word for God .. may or may not have happened .. he may be using an older document where someone else writing the story ,, or transmuting from oral History .. just substitutes the word YHWH for "Supreme God" or some such thing. .. again having zero to do with our English Translation - whether or not it is Usual or correct.

If YHWH was already in the text then the whole Documentary Hypothesis as seen through the eyes of Wellhausen and others can be thrown out.

Your claim that there are not two creation stories.. is purile ignorance/ Disingenuous Oblivion ... and this has nothing to do with Liberal Secularism. The Church has recognized this feature of Genesis for thousands of Years .. that one story is interwoven into the other ... that the same things are covered .. (such as the creation of Man) - in some times similar but some times different angles - sometimes contradicting.
This is horse you are trying to ride is completely dead .. Crucified - Buried .. so please don't be foolish and try to dig it back up.

It's plain that Genesis 2 is a more detailed story of the creation of man and not the creation of the universe imo

 

[muhammad_isa]

No Muhamu --- that is not the Path to "The Truth - The Way - The Light" .. do not so easy a follower be Friend ..

You are too rigid..
Jesus preached to people, and many understood him .. and some were rigid.
What can you not understand?

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together.
35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
- Matthew 22 -

..and the Lord your God is YHWH .. ALLAH .. the Most High !

 

[dybmh]

Why are you jumping in a post to another -- with a made up falsehood -- pretending I said No evidence for Abe's God Being EL - rather than responding to my post to you on this topic . The one whereyour ridiculous claim that Abe knew his God by the name YHWH was crucified .. You end up calling YHWH a Liar .. then trying to misinterpret and twist scripture to try to hide the lie.

Nope, known of that. It actually has Abe talking to YHWH, using that name. YHWH introduces itself to Abe. I am quoting the original language. You calimed Abe was using the name EL, when that's not a name in Hebrew, it's a preposition. And there's no verses that even come close to Abe using that name. It actually seems like he's avoiding using that name.

So, all you have is guess work. And you admitted that none of your theories are actually known. You don't know if a redactor went through and changed anything. You don't know anything. You have no evidence for anything. You have no scripture to support you. You've brought no scholarship to back you up. All you've brought is a pulpit.

Sorry mate -- there is a reason Modern Theological Scholarship states that the "Most High" God of Abe was EL .. and that even if this is wrong .. and it is some other High God --- that the name of this God was not YHWH.

Yeah, the name was known. There is plenty of good scholarship that supports me. The only scholarship supporting YOU is coming from the now defunct and bebunked documentary hypothesis. There are no 4 sources split based on divine name. That was ignorant from the beginning and it took 100+ years to prove it. it's been confirmed by non-biased computer analysis. It's done, over.

Now you can cry and hollar all you like .. but no need to demonize the messenger for telling you what Modern Theological Scholarship states .. and you can run and hide from the crucifixion .. but this is not going to erase the Holes ?

There are no holes. You have 1 verse that if read literally in english it says the name wasn't known. But there are so many verses that say the same thing when the name was obviously known. You are misunderstanding what this verse means, and I've show you the faults. So, your argument and others who make it are simply ignorant of the Hebrew bible and the Hebrew language. I've seen a lot of this. People with degrees making all kinds of false claims. All it takes is looking it up, and ... the bible critic has lost.

Why haven't you brought any of this theoloical scholarship on Exodus 6:3? Something which addresses these grammatical and interpretation issues?

 

[Sargonski]

If YHWH was already in the text then the whole Documentary Hypothesis as seen through the eyes of Wellhausen and others can be thrown out.

NO .. Completely Untrue .. False Logic .. and lacking understanding of what Doc Hypothesis is.

YHWH already in what text ? The text of "Genesis" of Course.

Dude .. The DH states that YHWH was aleady in the Text .. of Genesis .. What are you talking about the DH being thrown out if YHWH was already in the Text ???? This is a contradiction ..

OK -- In Genesis up until Gen 2:3 -- there is no mention of YHWH. The Earth is Created .. man is create by the Gods "US" and no this is not the modern Trinity "US" .. Perspective .. remember Man is created in the image of the Gods .. "In Our Image" and these are not three anthropomorphic entities fused into one. but that is another story. .. All you need to understand is YHWH is nowhere to be found .. the creation completed .. by the "Elohim" and on the 7th day some Rest.

There is a hard break in the story .. and a new story begins Gen 2:4 we are introduced to YHWH .. and we get a whole story about the deeds of YHWH completely separate from this other God in the first story.

The Documentary Hypothesis states that these stories were separate .. part of a different 'Tradition" ... then brought together at a later date .. the one story has some unnammed God(s) .. the other has this God named YHWH


So you have two documents .. one perhaps from the Northern Kingdom Tribes --- another tradition from after the Northern Kingdom Falls .. or later .. after the FAll of Babylon .. the debate being over time period .. the classical idea out of favor lately .. Not that these are not two separate sources - Traditions.

 

[dybmh]

man is create by the Gods "US"

No, actually not. There is a plural form. But the creating is done by a singluar being. That comes from the singluar conjugation of the verb.

See below. Verbs rule in Hebrew. Always check the verb. See the designation: 3ms. That's 3rd person, masculine, SINGULAR. Not a "we" creating. It's singular.

remember Man is created in the image of the Gods

Nah, it doesn't say that. There's no other gods in the chapter. God is singluar all the way through.

There is a hard break in the story .. and a new story begins Gen 2:4 we are introduced to YHWH .. and we get a whole story about the deeds of YHWH completely separate from this other God in the first story.

Not two gods, just two different types of revelation. The cycle of life needed mercy, and YHWH includes mercy. That's part of what it means to be eternally YOUR god. Forever and ever and always, no matter what? That's true mercy. I've posted all of this before. Gave you sources. You ignored it, because it didn't match the superficial myth that critics like.

The Documentary Hypothesis states that these stories were separate .. part of a different 'Tradition" ... then brought together at a later date .. the one story has some unnammed God(s) .. the other has this God named YHWH

But that's kinda been bebunked along with the DH. These stories are non-priestly per the non-biased computer analysis. They appear to be united linguistically.

And sincse there are no *actual* contradictions... there's no reason to split them anymore.

So you have two documents .. one perhaps from the Northern Kingdom Tribes --- another tradition from after the Northern Kingdom Falls .. or later .. after the FAll of Babylon .. the debate being over time period .. the classical idea out of favor lately .. Not that these are not two separate sources - Traditions.

No, no one knows the actual source or the date of authorship. They just guess at when the scrolls were stiched together. All the conjecture about the 2 different traditions of Gen 1 and Gen 2 sunk with the DH.

 

[Brian2]

NO .. Completely Untrue .. False Logic .. and lacking understanding of what Doc Hypothesis is.

YHWH already in what text ? The text of "Genesis" of Course.

Dude .. The DH states that YHWH was aleady in the Text .. of Genesis .. What are you talking about the DH being thrown out if YHWH was already in the Text ???? This is a contradiction ..

OK -- In Genesis up until Gen 2:3 -- there is no mention of YHWH. The Earth is Created .. man is create by the Gods "US" and no this is not the modern Trinity "US" .. Perspective .. remember Man is created in the image of the Gods .. "In Our Image" and these are not three anthropomorphic entities fused into one. but that is another story. .. All you need to understand is YHWH is nowhere to be found .. the creation completed .. by the "Elohim" and on the 7th day some Rest.

There is a hard break in the story .. and a new story begins Gen 2:4 we are introduced to YHWH .. and we get a whole story about the deeds of YHWH completely separate from this other God in the first story.

The Documentary Hypothesis states that these stories were separate .. part of a different 'Tradition" ... then brought together at a later date .. the one story has some unnammed God(s) .. the other has this God named YHWH


So you have two documents .. one perhaps from the Northern Kingdom Tribes --- another tradition from after the Northern Kingdom Falls .. or later .. after the FAll of Babylon .. the debate being over time period .. the classical idea out of favor lately .. Not that these are not two separate sources - Traditions.

I must have said it in a confusing way, sorry. What I meant to say is that if YHWH had already revealed His name before Moses arrived then there is no need to start wondering why some parts of Genesis have YHWH and other parts have God (in it's various forms)
You also seem confused about the Bible as a whole and it having been inspired by the one true God, YHWH, with no other true Gods around and with only YHWH as the God of creation.
Everything you say creates contradictions in the Bible.
Do you worship any God?
Which one do you worship?

 

[Sargonski]

You are too rigid..
Jesus preached to people, and many understood him .. and some were rigid.
What can you not understand?

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together.
35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:
36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
- Matthew 22 -

..and the Lord your God is YHWH .. ALLAH .. the Most High !

What of generalized idiocy is there to understand ? ... .. unsupported claims and name calling not an argument for much Friend .. attaching fine scripture to fallacious falsehood .. will not make the crooked path straight .. like putting Old Wine in new Wine skins .. "You Understand" ?

What is this rigidity you speak of Brother Muhamu - this reflection you see in the mirror - for tis you who would put the Most High in a Box full of nastyness and filth - blaspheme the name most holy ..the unforgivable sin. I have not done this thing ... merely pointed out a well fitted shoe to the Emperor with no clothes ..

Tell me what you know of my favorite Passage ... that which you unwittingly repeat .. Matt 7:12 Do not do to others what you hate - This Rule Sums up the Law and the Prophets. What of the Golden Rule did you wish to repeat ......No compulsion now to your feet .... explain why you are in Awe .. but don't know the way of Jah - Rastafa Allah !

 

[Sargonski]

I must have said it in a confusing way, sorry. What I meant to say is that if YHWH had already revealed His name before Moses arrived then there is no need to start wondering why some parts of Genesis have YHWH and other parts have God (in it's various forms)
You also seem confused about the Bible as a whole and it having been inspired by the one true God, YHWH, with no other true Gods around and with only YHWH as the God of creation.
Everything you say creates contradictions in the Bible.
Do you worship any God?
Which one do you worship?

I worship the Supreme One .. and nothing I have said has created any contradictions that did not already exist .. these contradictions you claim are born out of inspiration .. a heretical blasphemy of which you were previously unaware but hopefully will now understand

The Straight Path is not Crooked Brother B - Inspiration is not the Father of Contradiction - and you were not given a brain to ignore logic and reason .. Why heed you not the words of the Prophet and Priest of the Most High - Why do you accuse YHWH of telling A Lie ?

YHWH say his name was not revealed to Abe and Family .. "If you say YHWH had revealed his name to Abe before Moses" Then you Make YHWH a Liar .. and is you creating the contradiction then pretending I the one having contradiction in his Diction.

So now answer your own question "Do you worship Any God - Which One"

and last - Does your God wish that we kill the Child for the Sins of the Parent/Tribe - or should we make a rule say one person not be punished for the crime of another .. and tell me more about this contradiction you claim is inspired ?

Your post has brought up some interesting questions. Intended and/or otherwise .. Kudos for that much at least

 

[Sargonski]

No, actually not. There is a plural form. But the creating is done by a singluar being.

No, no one knows the actual source or the date of authorship. They just guess at when the scrolls were stiched together. All the conjecture about the 2 different traditions of Gen 1 and Gen 2 sunk with the DH.

Correct that the actual author and date of Authorship is unknown .. when the two traditions ( Gen 1 and 2) stitched together .. likely undergoing numerous Interations.

Incorrect on the Creating of man being done by Singular being and Incorrect on the "No No Please let a contradiction not be so"

In Gen 1 the creation of man is by "US" Let US create Man in Our Image .. which is true to the Creation story in which Every Israelite at the time was familiar. Not just every Israelite .. but but Everyone in the known world surrounding these folks .. everyone they had ever met or would ever meet .. all knew the "US" version of the story.

In Gen 2 The creation of man .. Singular

What can we say... but contradiction by definition. which really .. is to be expected from time to time given different Traditions .. one Tradition believing a version of the Story where Many Gods take part in Man's creation .. the other Tradition believing only one God creating man.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..for tis you who would put the Most High in a Box full of nastyness and filth..

I do no such thing .. I did not write the OT and Qur'an..
I merely interpret them.

It seems you prefer to ignore them, by attempting to discredit them.
It's your choice .. but not mine.

 

[Sargonski]

I do no such thing .. I did not write the OT and Qur'an..
I merely interpret them.

It seems you prefer to ignore them, by attempting to discredit them.
It's your choice .. but not mine.

Indeed you did do such a thing .. "Put God in a box of nasty" - and it is you who is desperate to ignore Scripture .. but now trying to project your sin onto others.

"I merely interpret them" a falsehood and self deception . you have expressed Beliefs .. ones which put God in a box of Nasty .. attribute horrible things to the God Most High .. done on the basis of false interpretation and/or ignoring scripture that doesn't fit .. an act of discredit.

and then try and blame me for the log in your eye.

You believe that the Supreme one is some irrational flip floping xenophobic genocidal maniac with the most petty and nasty of Human Characteristics .. a maleavolent Trickster God giving humans instructions to follow then punishing them for following those instructions .. a walking talking contradiction of nasty.

and while you are welcome to this nasty belief .. albeit one shared by millions of sheep -- I do not share it. "Its your Choice but not mine"

 

[mindlight]

From Muhammad to Krishna to Buddha and Baha’u’llah, it has been a norm amongst Christians of many denominations to accuse religionists of other religions of believing in satan himself and that all of these Teachers are ‘false Prophets’. Many times I have heard this said to me and others. Yet nowhere in the Bible does it categorically state by name that any of These Teachers are false. It is an interpretation by priests and clergy. All of Them taught love just as Christ did.

To be fair, I know of excellent Christians and priests who respect other religions and Prophets and they, I believe, are true Christians who practice love and tolerance towards all.

As a Christian, what do you believe about Muhammad or Buddha or Krishna and Baha’u’llah? Do you believe the different religions should mix with one another or shun each other? I once invited some Christians who knocked on my door to say some prayers together for humanity but they told me that their elders forbid them to do that because they could get ‘spiritually infected’! If Christ taught to love even ones enemy then this attitude towards other religions doesn’t sound right. What do you think?

All of these are false when they contradict the message Christians have already received and agreed on. But Muhammed spoke truthes and especially in the early part of his ministry when he warned that people should not take God for granted. The overall message of Islam contains clear truthes like about the Sovereignty of God, that God is One, that God is the Judge and the Creator. But what they say about Redemption is a clear contradiction of the Christian message.

It is better to talk to people from these backgrounds in the context of friendship rather than with guns though. Mutual respect coupled without accepting lies is the best approach

 

[muhammad_isa]

..a maleavolent Trickster God giving humans instructions to follow then punishing them for following those instructions .. a walking talking contradiction of nasty..

It's all in your imagination..
Are you trying to say you don't believe in the concept of hell?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What???
"no other gods" does not imply that they are real .. in the sense that they have created anything or have some kind of power.

So you're saying "gods" does not denote actual "gods"?

Where are you getting the implication that the gods referred to are false?

 

[muhammad_isa]

So you're saying "gods" does not denote actual "gods"?

Where are you getting the implication that the gods referred to are false?

It is quite obvious to me..
Polytheism is about various different gods, each having roles to play .. or competing
with one another for supremacy etc.

The OT and Qur'an teach that worshiping idols is futile.
Let me ask you this .. what 'gods' do you claim might be real?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It is quite obvious to me..

So you have nothing but your gut feeling, then.

Polytheism is about various different gods, each having roles to play .. or competing
with one another for supremacy etc.

Right: the ancient Israelites believed that Yahweh was the god responsible for Israel specifically, and that other nations were responsible for other gods.

Monotheism only became predominant in Jusaism after the Babylonian exile.

The OT and Qur'an teach that worshiping idols is futile.

In the case of the OT, it's because they believed Yahweh was the best and strongest god, not because Yahweh was the only god.

11 Who is like you,[ag] O Lord, among the gods?[ah]
Who is like you—majestic in holiness, fearful in praises,[ai] working wonders?
12 You stretched out your right hand,
the earth swallowed them.[aj]

Bible Gateway passage: Exodus 15:11-12 - New English Translation

Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you—majestic in holiness, fearful in praises, working wonders? You stretched out your right hand, the earth swallowed them.

www.biblegateway.com

Let me ask you this .. what 'gods' do you claim might be real?

I don't claim that any gods are real. I'm saying that the ancient Israelites thought many gods were real even when worshipping only one.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I don't claim that any gods are real. I'm saying that the ancient Israelites thought many gods were real even when worshipping only one.

Some of them might well have done .. so what?

 

[wellwisher]

From Muhammad to Krishna to Buddha and Baha’u’llah, it has been a norm amongst Christians of many denominations to accuse religionists of other religions of believing in satan himself and that all of these Teachers are ‘false Prophets’. Many times I have heard this said to me and others. Yet nowhere in the Bible does it categorically state by name that any of These Teachers are false. It is an interpretation by priests and clergy. All of Them taught love just as Christ did.

To be fair, I know of excellent Christians and priests who respect other religions and Prophets and they, I believe, are true Christians who practice love and tolerance towards all.

As a Christian, what do you believe about Muhammad or Buddha or Krishna and Baha’u’llah? Do you believe the different religions should mix with one another or shun each other? I once invited some Christians who knocked on my door to say some prayers together for humanity but they told me that their elders forbid them to do that because they could get ‘spiritually infected’! If Christ taught to love even ones enemy then this attitude towards other religions doesn’t sound right. What do you think?

The Bible is two books. The New Testament is the second book, about Jesus and love. Christians who spend too much time on the the first book; Old Testament; law, fire and brimstone, instead of faith, love and hope, start to become more Abrahamic in behavior than Christian in behavior. The Old Testament connects them to the notion of a chosen race; Jews, with all others called Gentiles; beneath them. The Old Testament is also about being punished like the Jews, being conquered again and again due to too much departure from the code.

I was brought up Catholic, which tends to stay in the New Testament. Priests have no problem with anyone Confirmed, who wishes to continue their spiritual journey, dabbling in other religions; love your enemy since your enemy often comes from you own prejudices; your own household. I was 13 years old and given the blessing to keep learning, since I knew where home was; family of man.

What may have created this current situation is the Protestant movement of the 15th century. Christianity divided and many broke away from the Catholic Church, and in doing so many threw out the baby with the bath water. The baby was clean. There was movement back to the Old Testament, which is more judgmental and often elitist. There are now so many little churches, that each tries to have its niche and needs to recruit and hold members. The older churches are less extreme and tend to be more open minded.

When Atheist lump this all together they are not being rational to this data. The position of the Catholic Church is there is no conflict with evolution and one is allowed to learn or not. This is why I seek to find a way to connect religion and science; natural selection changes to man made selection about 6000 years ago causing a new type of human to emerge based on the repression of natural instinct.

There are few, if any natural people left on earth, under only natural selection. Manmade selection dominates; money, power and the lies of politics competing for sheep.