• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Islam, Christianity and modern Judaism are all apostate religious institutions.

Godobeyer

the word "Islam" means "submission" to God
Premium Member

thanks for post this , inspite that i don't trust much anti-Islam sitees (ansewering-islam)
It's seems Quran and Torah , disagree on :

1-Torah limited : the circumcision ; The sign of the Abrahamic covenant was/is male circumcision, specifically done on the eighth day ; "don't match"

2- Torah forbid camel meat, Quran Allow it . "don't match"

3-The Muslim don't observe in Sabbath Day , the Israelites to observe the Sabbath day. " don't match" ,

inspite Quran speak about Sabbath Day to Jews .

4-remarry divorced wife " don't match"

5- Quran and Torah agreed on prohibits anyone from touching a woman during her menstrual period ."Matched"

6- in deep past captive women are most of time become slaves women . since slavery allowed in Torah , so it's matched .

7- "God forbids the Israelites from destroying trees providing food under any circumstance."

maybe some Israelites were disobeying God by destroying trees of Palestinians ? and thousand of homes of innocent in Gaza ?

that verse of Quran talking about case when some scholars said this verse talking about some Muslim cut some trees in battlefield to train, or warning .
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I don't listen to sojourner.

All of Romans 9 (predestination) is based off of misleading quotes from the Tanakh. Would be more than happy to demonstrate if you want.

Oh….and Paul was not one of the twelve apostles. He has no authority as one.
Dear God! Romans 9 has little to do with predestination.
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
thanks for post this , inspite that i don't trust much anti-Islam sitees (ansewering-islam)
It's seems Quran and Torah , disagree on :

1-Torah limited : the circumcision ; The sign of the Abrahamic covenant was/is male circumcision, specifically done on the eighth day ; "don't match"

2- Torah forbid camel meat, Quran Allow it . "don't match"

3-The Muslim don't observe in Sabbath Day , the Israelites to observe the Sabbath day. " don't match" ,

inspite Quran speak about Sabbath Day to Jews .

4-remarry divorced wife " don't match"

5- Quran and Torah agreed on prohibits anyone from touching a woman during her menstrual period ."Matched"

6- in deep past captive women are most of time become slaves women . since slavery allowed in Torah , so it's matched .

7- "God forbids the Israelites from destroying trees providing food under any circumstance."

maybe some Israelites were disobeying God by destroying trees of Palestinians ? and thousand of homes of innocent in Gaza ?

that verse of Quran talking about case when some scholars said this verse talking about some Muslim cut some trees in battlefield to train, or warning .
Agreed. This is not an exhaustive list by any means. But yes, we are in agreement on the differences at least.
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
Right, so if Paul spends a lot of time writing, with educated scribes, his lexicon might be more vast, can better put it into words... So because Christ doesn't say "predestination" outright, it means it's not what he's teaching? Is that your position? Because you're muddling words, not meaning.

Why are you and sojourner at odds, when he makes the same case for homosexuality, anyway? You guys argue the same, it seems.

How can #3 or #4 not seem obvious? Romans 8:29-30 essentially says the same thing with more fluent language. Tell me how one, per Jesus' own words, comes to Christ? If the Father chooses it and the Father is all knowing God, can you argue it's willy nilly or designed ahead of time? When Jesus references the "elect" what do you think he's talking about...?

EDIT: For what it's worth, I don't think Christ nor Paul were deterministic in the Calvinist sense of the notion, at least not in such a hard lined manner. I'm not, at least, because I don't think it's what EITHER are teaching; people get hung up on language and words rather than concepts; I don't know.
No…3 and 4 are NOT obvious at all. God searches the earth looking for those who are humble and seeks them out. This has nothing to do with predestination at all. Just the way God works (in the present tense).
 

Godobeyer

the word "Islam" means "submission" to God
Premium Member
The Torah prohibits Jews from following any prophet that tells Isreal to follow "other commandments". Your prophet clearly teaches against numerous commandments which all devout Jews believe were given by God Himself. Its illogical for Muslims to say they "believe in the Torah" when they follow Muhammed. Torah is an all or nothing law structure. No man has the right to teach against them and still claim they "follow it".
We Muslims believe in Torah that it's comes from God , but we believe it's corrupted , so it's could contianed true and false teaching
 

catch22

Active Member
I don't listen to sojourner.

All of Romans 9 (predestination) is based off of misleading quotes from the Tanakh. Would be more than happy to demonstrate if you want.

Oh….and Paul was not one of the twelve apostles. He has no authority as one.

Romans 9? Well, clarify then, because I don't see how you mean.

He wasn't among the original 12, no, nor did he claim to be. He said he was least of all. However, Jesus elects apostles, and Jesus elected Paul.
 

catch22

Active Member
No…3 and 4 are NOT obvious at all. God searches the earth looking for those who are humble and seeks them out. This has nothing to do with predestination at all. Just the way God works (in the present tense).

Oh, is that your limited scope, god who is still "learning" the ropes? So let me ask you this: what's the difference if God knows beforehand whom will or will not obey? Is it your opinion He's incapable?

In light of that, explain Exodus 4:21 to us.
 
Last edited:

catch22

Active Member
Paul's deceitful misquotes of scripture (Romans 3)

Guess what? In David's picture there are no atheistic fools who do good! This passage is obviously not speaking of every human being, but of a distinct group of people whom David describes as fools, atheists, workers of abominations, corrupt, ignorant, and workers of iniquity. Of course, not one of them do good. And these evil people are contrasted with a second group of real people known as "my people" and "the generation of the righteous". Right there in this very Psalm that Paul quotes from, there are obviously those whom God calls "righteous"! This is hardly the picture Paul wants us to get from this Psalm. Notice also Paul's embellishment of this passage. He would have us believe the phrase, "no, not one" is used twice when it is only used once. The first time Paul uses the phrase is where it doesn't exist, and it is coupled with the word "righteous". This word does not exist in this part of the Psalm, or anywhere near the words "no, not one". The word "righteous" only shows up later in verse 5, and there it directly implies that there are those who are righteous! So much for "no, not one".

In Paul's string of quotes, he continues to take snippets of Scripture out of their context from Psalm 5:9, Psalm 140:3, Psalm 10:7, Isaiah 59:7,8, and Psalm 36:1. In each and every case, the unrighteous individuals spoken of in these passages are specifically evil men, and in the greater context of these passages, the evil men are contrasted with those who are called "the righteous", "the upright", and "the innocent". Please check for yourself. Not only is there no support for Paul's picture in these passages, but in their proper context, the exact opposite is firmly established.

I guess only Israel has not disobeyed God. If only we didn't ever sin like David... Hold on a minute......

Did you read versus 19 and 20??

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law isthe knowledge of sin.

If any could uphold the law, what's the purpose of Jesus? Yes, it's an ideal you can't fathom, but then again, you're watching Star Wars alone, and not the Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi.

No wonder you're confused...

I hope it doesn't shock you that Paul is more an authority on the Torah than you are. His message here was pointed.
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
Oh, is that your limited scope, god who is still "learning" the ropes? So let me ask you this: what's the difference if God knows beforehand whom will or will not obey? Is it your opinion He's incapable?

In light of that, explain Exodus 4:21 to us.

Did I ever say that God can't override a person's will? He most certainly can and has done it on a few occasions. This is one of them and Cyrus the great was another. There is no concept in Exodus of God predetermining the fate and will of Pharaoh though. Pharaoh had demonstrated abstinence against God and His people. His heart was already hard. God just increased it upon Pharaoh.

Here is the simple truth concerning Pharaoh that even a child can easily grasp. To the extent that Pharaoh hardened his own heart without the intervention of God will be the same extant to which he will be held accountable and judged for his actions. If God desires to be known as "righteous", which He obviously does, He cannot hold anyone accountable for actions in which they had no choice. Period.
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
Romans 9? Well, clarify then, because I don't see how you mean.

He wasn't among the original 12, no, nor did he claim to be. He said he was least of all. However, Jesus elects apostles, and Jesus elected Paul.
Before I get to Romans 9, I want to address what you just said about Paul. Paul did claim to be one of the twelve and he even titled most of his letters with the declaration "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ". Funny thing, Jesus ONLY chose twelve to be his apostles…not 13.

Paul claims to greater then the apostles:

Paul's view of himself as an apostle didn't stop at only claiming to be an apostle. He also did what he could to communicate to his followers that he topped them all. He even had the nerve to belittle the very apostles that Jesus had called and trained for three and a half years to be his witnesses! Among this braggadocio's self-flattering quotes are the following.

"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles". ...."As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me from this boasting in the regions of Achaia." 2 Corinthians 11:5,10

Sometimes, as though he knew he should be ashamed of challenging the stature of Jesus' 12, he would preface his boast with a statement of unworthiness. No doubt he hoped people would embrace him as the greatest of apostles because he was so humble.

"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all...". 1Corinthians 15:9,10

Aside from the fact that it was a lie to suggest the ministry had been split up between Jews and Gentiles ...as though he had exclusive rights to the Gentiles and the 12 were to stay with the Jews..., Paul even had the gall to condescend specifically on Peter, James, and John when he belittled them to the Galatians.

"But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas (Peter), and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." Galatians 2:6,7,9

This is nothing but an arrogant lie. A couple verses later, Paul takes another cheap-shot at Peter. With Peter nowhere around to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he had determined Peter was a hypocrite, and how he had put him down before the entire church of Antioch.

"But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews played the hypocrite with him so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straight forward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "if you being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Galatians 2:11-14

Earlier, in Galatians 1:8,9, Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. There is little doubt that Paul wanted the Galatians to think this way toward Peter, if not James, and John as well. It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.

Aside from Paul's incredible arrogance, I also need to point out that Paul himself was the ultimate hypocrite for condemning Peter for accommodating Gentiles when he was around Gentiles and acting like a Jew around Jews. Here is what he claimed to do, and commanded the Corinthians to do as well.

"For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without the law as without law... that I might win those who are without law; to the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." 1Corinthians 9:19-22

"Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. Give no offense, either to the Jews or to the Greeks or to the church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ." 1Corinthians 10:31-33

When Paul says, "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ" we should do as he says... because in no way did he imitate Jesus! Can anyone imagine Jesus playing chameleon and saying anything like "I have become all things to all men" or "I please all men in all things"?

Jesus affirms the authority of the twelve in Revelation!

12It had a great and high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels; and names were written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel. 13There were three gates on the east and three gates on the north and three gates on the south and three gates on the west. 14And the wall of the city had twelve foundation stones, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. Rev 21: 12-12

This letter was recorded well after Paul's missionary journeys as well as his false claims of being an apostle. Looks like Jesus wasn't convinced. Ouch.
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
I guess only Israel has not disobeyed God. If only we didn't ever sin like David... Hold on a minute......

Did you read versus 19 and 20??



If any could uphold the law, what's the purpose of Jesus? Yes, it's an ideal you can't fathom, but then again, you're watching Star Wars alone, and not the Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi.

No wonder you're confused...

I hope it doesn't shock you that Paul is more an authority on the Torah than you are. His message here was pointed.

"Now we know that whatever the Law says, it says to those who are under the Law, that (for this purpose) every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the Law is the knowledge of sin." Romans 3:19,20

This begins to defy words to describe the blasphemous lie that it is. But hey! Paul has to come up with some reason for the Law's existence after demolishing the truth! Are we really to believe now that it is God's purpose to make man guilty before Him? If God intentionally made His Law impossible for man to keep, that would make God the author of unrighteousness and guilt!

Here is God's version of why He gave the Law.

"Oh, that they had such a heart in them that they would fear Me and always keep all My commandments, that (for this purpose) it might be well with them and with their children forever!" Deuteronomy 5:29

"And the Lord commanded us to observe all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that (for this purpose) He might preserve us alive, as it is this day. Then it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to observe all these commandments before the Lord our God, as He has commanded us." Deuteronomy 6:24,25

This blasphemous lie that makes God out to be some kind of pathological tyrant who commands people to obey Him when He knows they can't... just to keep them filled with guilt, humiliated, and begging for grace and mercy, is by itself more than enough to finish off Paul and nail his hide to the wall as a false apostle. Yeshua never taught anything remotely close to this. But we are still long from being finished with Paul's doctrinal errors. He goes on to mention some fringe benefits that go along with his evil picture of God. The logic flows that if no man is capable of doing God's Law, and salvation is instead granted as a free gift of grace, then no one can brag about keeping the Law anymore!

Where is boasting then? It is excluded, By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the Law. Romans 3:27,28

Never mind the fact that it is an important part of the Law for man to know his place and humble himself! If people kept all the Law they wouldn't be boasting anyway.

"He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6:8

Notice also what it says about the man who gave us the Law.

Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth. Numbers 12:3

God has never been in the business of making it impossible for man to boast. He just makes it not worth the while for those who do. The irony is, in the real world, Paul's doctrine is the source of far more pride and boasting than any other doctrine! One only need look at Paul himself and notice how he lifted himself above the very apostles who followed Yeshua (2Corinthians 11:5, Galatians 2:6,9), and how he even lifted himself above Moses by belittling him in 2Corithians 3:11-13. Anyone who believes that God actually destined before creation some vessels for honor and some for dishonor (Romans 9:20-23), and also believes he just happens to be one who is destined for honor, cannot avoid thinking way too highly of themselves, because they actually have grounds on which to boast!
 

JoStories

Well-Known Member
Romans 9? Well, clarify then, because I don't see how you mean.

He wasn't among the original 12, no, nor did he claim to be. He said he was least of all. However, Jesus elects apostles, and Jesus elected Paul.
How so? He didn't know Paul nor did he ever speak to him. Delusions and hallucinations are not means of speaking to someone other than through the guise of mental illness. Paulian dogma is so much the opposite of what Christ taught as to be the antithesis of those teachings at all.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
How so? He didn't know Paul nor did he ever speak to him. Delusions and hallucinations are not means of speaking to someone other than through the guise of mental illness. Paulian dogma is so much the opposite of what Christ taught as to be the antithesis of those teachings at all.
Is it? Paul was closer to the Jesus Event than were the gospel writers. Paul began writing about 45 C.E. The earliest gospel we have dates to post-70 C.E. How do we know that the gospel writers don't "have it wrong?"
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
How so? He didn't know Paul nor did he ever speak to him. Delusions and hallucinations are not means of speaking to someone other than through the guise of mental illness. Paulian dogma is so much the opposite of what Christ taught as to be the antithesis of those teachings at all.
Well said. Actually, Paul's claim of having a private vision experience where he "met Jesus" actually contradicts the very words of Jesus.

23“Then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There He is,’ do not believe him. 24“For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. 25“Behold, I have told you in advance.26“So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them.27“For (because) just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28“Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather. Matt 24: 23-27

Jesus tells us:

-False Christ's will arise and false prophets
- He says they will perform miracles
- Says these people will claim he is "in the desert" or they meet him "in private" (inner rooms) *Paul's vision was in a literal desert!!
- Jesus says that when he returns it will be like "lightning flashing from east to west" (Implying that everyone will see him)

Jesus confirms this in Revelation:

"Look, he is coming with the clouds," and every eye will see him Rev 1: 7

Jesus' warning is clear. Don't listen to those who say they have privately met Jesus "in the wilderness" or in "inner rooms" (private). Jesus says that when he returns "every eye will see him". This is how we know that Paul never met the true Jesus on the road to damascus. His own testimony has tied his own noose.
 

Simplelogic

Well-Known Member
5- Quran and Torah agreed on prohibits anyone from touching a woman during her menstrual period ."Matched"

Thank you for addressing the differences. Also, I am in agreement with your prophet on this issue. The Torah is clearly referring to sexual intercourse itself. Jewish interpretation has added greatly to this command and prevented men from getting anywhere near their wives during this time. An interpretation I don't agree with.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Well said. Actually, Paul's claim of having a private vision experience where he "met Jesus" actually contradicts the very words of Jesus.

23“Then if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There He is,’ do not believe him. 24“For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect. 25“Behold, I have told you in advance.26“So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them.27“For (because) just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be. 28“Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather. Matt 24: 23-27

Jesus tells us:

-False Christ's will arise and false prophets
- He says they will perform miracles
- Says these people will claim he is "in the desert" or they meet him "in private" (inner rooms) *Paul's vision was in a literal desert!!
- Jesus says that when he returns it will be like "lightning flashing from east to west" (Implying that everyone will see him)

Jesus confirms this in Revelation:

"Look, he is coming with the clouds," and every eye will see him Rev 1: 7

Jesus' warning is clear. Don't listen to those who say they have privately met Jesus "in the wilderness" or in "inner rooms" (private). Jesus says that when he returns "every eye will see him". This is how we know that Paul never met the true Jesus on the road to damascus. His own testimony has tied his own noose.
Problem is, if you knew the literature as well as you let on, you'd know that Paul didn't see Jesus. The language strongly suggests a revelation -- not a manifestation.
 
Top