"Word of God" & discrepancies???

[JayHawes]

u need to learn singular & pleural again.

Were these judges given word of God.???
JN 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken.

Apparently you dont care about going into the OT and studying the chapter where Jesus quoted that Scripture. Yes, God's words did come to the Israeli judges, they were the ones who rendered judgment.

I dont need to learn singular and plural. What you can't seem to wrap around your head is that that devil was called Legion, which means many, it was many devils, combined into one spirit being.

 

[JayHawes]

No part says Jesus was LITERALLY son of God.

It's only human conjecture that they believe Jesus as literal son of God, while Angels & other prophets & even judges have been called as son of God in bible.



i don't get what verses told them NOT to believe other sons as real son of God !!!!but adopted sons.

Yes there r verses saying "begotten son" BUT these have been REMOVED from many VERSIONs of bible by christian scholars themselves.

No the phrase "begotten son" has not been removed. It has been trnaslated differently so that people can understand it. The same greek word remains, which means begotten.

1jo 4:9 -In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him

Begotten comes from the Greek:

[SIZE=+1]monogenhvß Monogenes (mon-og-en-ace'); [/SIZE]
Word Origin: Greek, Adjective, Strong #: 3439

1. single of its kind, only
   1. used of only sons or daughters (viewed in relation to their parents)
   2. used of Christ, denotes the only begotten son of God

 

[FFH]

Hey, benign, don't have time now to go over those discrepencies, but here's news for you and all, the King James has errors, missing pages, chapters, verses, words and even punctuation....

For an inspired Bible see the Joseph Smith translation/inspired version of the King james...

 

[JayHawes]

Hey, benign, don't have time now to go over those discrepencies, but here's news for you and all, the King James has errors, missing pages, chapters, verses, words and even punctuation....

For an inspired Bible see the Joseph Smith translation/inspired version of the King james...

:biglaugh:ha...Please dont infer that Jospeh Smith, had the right to "retranslate" the KJV (Which he didn't, he simply took words out and added words- Which God damned) without ONE manuscript of the original writings.

Inform me about these missing pages, chapters and verses also please.

 

[FFH]

:biglaugh:ha...Please dont infer that Jospeh Smith, had the right to "retranslate" the KJV (Which he didn't, he simply took words out and added words- Which God damned) without ONE manuscript of the original writings.

Inform me about these missing pages, chapters and verses also please.

The King James is mostly correct, but some vital teachings are missing or twisted a bit in the King James...

It would take weeks to go over all the missing pages, chapters, verses, words and yes, even grammar is a bit off and punctuation.

It took me a couple of months just to mark all the differences in a side by side text containing the two versions...

One can only appreciate what Joseph Smith did when comparing the two and pouring over all the errors in the King james..

Truly Joseph Smith has done more for the salvation of man than any other man who has lived on this earth, other that Christ of course...

Pick a verse Jay and I'll be glad to compare it to the Joseph Smith Inspired version..

Most pages, chapters, verses, words, etc are intact, in the King james, but there are many that are not...

I'll start a thread concerning this entitled "King James Errors" or something to that affect...

 

[kmkemp]

The King James is mostly correct, but some vital teachings are missing or twisted a bit in the King James...

It would take weeks to go over all the missing pages, chapters, verses, words and yes, even grammar is a bit off and punctuation.

It took me a couple of months just to mark all the differences in a side by side text containing the two versions...

One can only appreciate what Joseph Smith did when comparing the two and pouring over all the errors in the King james..

Truly Joseph Smith has done more for the salvation of man than any other man who has lived on this earth, other that Christ of course...

Pick a verse Jay and I'll be glad to compare it to the Joseph Smith Inspired version..

Most pages, chapters, verses, words, etc are intact, in the King james, but there are many that are not...

I'll start a thread concerning this entitled "King James Errors" or something to that affect...

If you hold that non-LDS Christians still have salvation, then how did Joseph Smith help the salvation of anyone at all? Much less more than any other man in history (sans Christ)?

 

[benign6]

No part says Jesus was LITERALLY son of God.

It's only human conjecture that they believe Jesus as literal son of God, while Angels & other prophets & even judges have been called as son of God in bible.

i don't get what verses told them NOT to believe other sons as real son of God !!!!but adopted sons.

Yes there r verses saying "begotten son" BUT these have been REMOVED from many VERSIONs of bible by christian scholars themselves.

The only apperant contradiction you listed involve numbers and years,

Read again:
(4)Read Matthew 27:9 and notice the quotation Jeremiah. But the quote is actually found in Zech. 11:12-13 and not found in the book of Jeremiah at all. Did Matthew get his Old Testament mixed up?
(5) James 2:20-24 tells us that Abraham was justified by works and Gal. 2:16 clearly says a man is not justified by works. Which is it?
(7) MT 12:40, John:1:51, Was Jesus son of man -or- son of God ???
(9) 1 John 5:7 – (AV)"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the FATHER,
the WORD, and the HOLY GHOST: and these three are one." has been removed in revised
version (RSV) --------------- so it comes closer to Quran (Quran:4:171)
(10) 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." (John 3:16 - AV) , Now word “BEGOTTEN” has been removed from in revised standard version saying that it was interpolation. ------------ Same as Quran said 1428 years back.(Quran:19:88--92) & (112:3)
(11) Every Bible in every language, prior to 1952(when the RSV first appeared), had these verses:-
"So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was TAKEN UP INTO HEAVEN, and sat down at the right hand of God."(Mark 16:19)
"While he blessed them, he parted from them, and was CARRIED UP INTO HEAVEN." (Luke 24:51)

These verses(regarding ascension) were converted to mere footnotes in RSV published in 1952 (i.e. NOT considered part of bible). & Mark 16 was made to end at verse 8.
Then again they changed RSV & brought those verses back to their previous position.
It is an old, old game. The Jews and the Christians have been editing their "Book of God" from its very inception.
(12)“Scofield Reference Bible" added word "Alah" but decided to use one “L” inatead of 2 as "Allah". Later they removed this term “Alah” from "Scofield Reference Bible”.(I have picture of that page but unable to up-load it !!!)
(16)I CHRONICLES 21:Satan made David number Israel.No No No it was LORD II SAMUEL 24:1 How could the Almighty God have been the source of these contradictory "INSPIRATIONS?" In which religion is the DEVIL synonymous with GOD?

(21)II SAMUEL10:18:40 Thousand Horsemen -or- Footmen I CHRONICLES 19:18:were killed???

& what about these christians who admit what u r having difficulty admitting???
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showpost.php?p=853368&postcount=3

...and your saying thats proof that the Bible was altered, what would the motavation for that be....

motivation was to justify their pre-conceived concepts of Jesus being son of God etc etc.

wouldn't they alter the verses about the diety of Christ only. Why would they alter the number of years in Kings or chronicles, and they weren't that dumb,

May b they were dumb enough!!!! Bible has been altered over & over again & by many persons thats why discrepencies appear....

This what is in my knowledge, surely there would have been alterations before these as well:-
RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version contains seven extra "books". Does this give any idea what I ment??? & these books were called "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY despite the warning ;-
". . . If any man shall add to these things(or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book." (Revelation of RCV bible 22:18-19)

• Then there are Authorised(AV) or the King James Version(KJV) of protestants1611.A.D.
• Then Revised in 1881 = Revised version (RV)
• Then American Standard version in 1901
• Then Re-revised in 1952 as RSV=Revised Stabdard Version.
• Then re-re-revised in 1971 (still called RSV ).

Before that following versions had been written:-

• 1st English version of bible by William Tyndale, who was publically burned to death by christians for willfully perverting the meaning of previous scriptures of bible. yet his translation became foundation of subsequent English versions.
• Coverdale version 1535
• Thomas Matthew 1537
• The Great Bible 1539
• The Geneva Bible 1550
• The Bishops’ Bible 1568

like if I said I met the president today or I met the president and his three secret service agents today, either way I wouldn't be lying.

But if u said u met 3 agents --- & ---- next time u say u met 7agents.. .... bible has mistakes like this one.

Mind u, there was NO numeric "0" in hebrew when bible was 1st written. It was introduced by Arabs later on... & numbers were written in words like "Ahaziah was FORTY TWO"/"Ahaziah was TWENTY TWO" ........ "four hundred" & "four thousand" .... not that writer had a slip of hand writing "400" & added one more "0" accidently to make it "4000".

 

[Polaris]

Joseph Smith calimed to have done better than Jesus Christ:

I have more to boast of than any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such work as I (History of the Church, Vol.6, pp. 408-09).

Such arrogance is damnable

Wow is there a thread somewhere in which you don't take bits and pieces of LDS quotes out of context?

Go read the rest of the entry and you'll see that his "boasting" is done in the same spirit and for the same purpose as that of Paul (2 Corinthians 11). You'll also see that before closing his entry he puts everything into proper perspective by giving glory to God and emphasizing the need for humility and meekness.

 

[JayHawes]

Read again:
(4)Read Matthew 27:9 and notice the quotation Jeremiah. But the quote is actually found in Zech. 11:12-13 and not found in the book of Jeremiah at all. Did Matthew get his Old Testament mixed up?

4) Matthew 27:9 says the words were spoken by Jeremiah, not written. However let's not ignore proper hebrew. Matthew 27:9 refers to Jeremiah 18:1-4, 19:1-3. The Potter is a fashioner, not just a fashioner of clay but of metal (in OT times). At one point in time Jeremiah spoke this Prophecy, it may be that in latter times Zechariah wrote it. The bible cannot contradict itself so says Jesus (John 10:35)

James 2:20-24 tells us that Abraham was justified by works and Gal. 2:16 clearly says a man is not justified by works. Which is it?

Galatians 2:16 does not say a man is not justifiewd by works, but that a man is not justified by the works of the law. In other works a man cannot justify himself before God by keeping the law.

Justification takes two forms. 1) Justified by faith to produce good works. 2) Justified by works of the law without faith. Arbaham by his faith, left home for a land he had never seen. He kept faith in God throughout his life, and always depended on him. Because of this, (and not by trying to keep the law, but by faith) Abraham was justified in his faith, by his works through faith.
Becuase if you finshed quoting Galatians 2:16 we are justified by "faith in Jesus Christ." Of course Jesus Christ had not come in Abraham's time, his faith in God would have justified him, his faith then would produce good works. That's why James wrote in James 2:20 "But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

If Abraham had faith, but didn't show it in his works, his faith would be dead. Galatians teaches that if you do the works, that alone does not justify you, but your faith must justify you. They are both punching at the same bag, that Faith must be shown by works. Not just works alone. They do not contradict.

 

[JayHawes]

Read again:
(4)Read Matthew 27:9 and notice the quotation Jeremiah. But the quote is actually found in Zech. 11:12-13 and not found in the book of Jeremiah at all. Did Matthew get his Old Testament mixed up?
(5) James 2:20-24 tells us that Abraham was justified by works and Gal. 2:16 clearly says a man is not justified by works. Which is it?
(7) MT 12:40, John:1:51, Was Jesus son of man -or- son of God ???
(9) 1 John 5:7 – (AV)"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the FATHER,
the WORD, and the HOLY GHOST: and these three are one." has been removed in revised
version (RSV) --------------- so it comes closer to Quran (Quran:4:171)
(10) 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." (John 3:16 - AV) , Now word “BEGOTTEN” has been removed from in revised standard version saying that it was interpolation. ------------ Same as Quran said 1428 years back.(Quran:19:88--92) & (112:3)
(11) Every Bible in every language, prior to 1952(when the RSV first appeared), had these verses:-
"So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was TAKEN UP INTO HEAVEN, and sat down at the right hand of God."(Mark 16:19)
"While he blessed them, he parted from them, and was CARRIED UP INTO HEAVEN." (Luke 24:51)

These verses(regarding ascension) were converted to mere footnotes in RSV published in 1952 (i.e. NOT considered part of bible). & Mark 16 was made to end at verse 8.
Then again they changed RSV & brought those verses back to their previous position.
It is an old, old game. The Jews and the Christians have been editing their "Book of God" from its very inception.
(12)“Scofield Reference Bible" added word "Alah" but decided to use one “L” inatead of 2 as "Allah". Later they removed this term “Alah” from "Scofield Reference Bible”.(I have picture of that page but unable to up-load it !!!)
(16)I CHRONICLES 21:Satan made David number Israel.No No No it was LORD II SAMUEL 24:1 How could the Almighty God have been the source of these contradictory "INSPIRATIONS?" In which religion is the DEVIL synonymous with GOD?

(21)II SAMUEL10:18:40 Thousand Horsemen -or- Footmen I CHRONICLES 19:18:were killed???

& what about these christians who admit what u r having difficulty admitting???
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showpost.php?p=853368&postcount=3

motivation was to justify their pre-conceived concepts of Jesus being son of God etc etc. May b they were dumb enough!!!! Bible has been altered over & over again & by many persons thats why discrepencies appear....

This what is in my knowledge, surely there would have been alterations before these as well:-
RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version contains seven extra "books". Does this give any idea what I ment??? & these books were called "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY despite the warning ;-
". . . If any man shall add to these things(or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book." (Revelation of RCV bible 22:18-19)

• Then there are Authorised(AV) or the King James Version(KJV) of protestants1611.A.D.
• Then Revised in 1881 = Revised version (RV)
• Then American Standard version in 1901
• Then Re-revised in 1952 as RSV=Revised Stabdard Version.
• Then re-re-revised in 1971 (still called RSV ).

Before that following versions had been written:-

• 1st English version of bible by William Tyndale, who was publically burned to death by christians for willfully perverting the meaning of previous scriptures of bible. yet his translation became foundation of subsequent English versions.
• Coverdale version 1535
• Thomas Matthew 1537
• The Great Bible 1539
• The Geneva Bible 1550
• The Bishops’ Bible 1568

But if u said u met 3 agents --- & ---- next time u say u met 7agents.. .... bible has mistakes like this one.

Mind u, there was NO numeric "0" in hebrew when bible was 1st written. It was introduced by Arabs later on... & numbers were written in words like "Ahaziah was FORTY TWO"/"Ahaziah was TWENTY TWO" ........ "four hundred" & "four thousand" .... not that writer had a slip of hand writing "400" & added one more "0" accidently to make it "4000".

The RSV came from different manuscripts of the Bible. There are over 600 manuscripts some of them were written by men who lived in Egypt. These men whom we know was Origen and others. Wrote copies of the bible, and they put their ideas into them. It is these manuscripts, from which the RSV comes. Not the RSV is not the Authoritive Bible, declaring the true translation of the bible. THe King James Version is still the main version used, as it should be. the RSv comes from different manuscripts than that of the KJV, those that came from Alexandria. I'm not surpirsed that some words are changed.

What you need to rememebr also is that the original greek, and hebrew and Aramaic still remains, jsut becuase the RSV changes words to agree with the Quran doesn't mean that is how it is supposed to be, study the original words.

But what is your point? Muslims today claim that the Bible has become corrupt. Yet we can find manuscripts dating less than 5-20 years after the crucifixion of Jesus...at what point in time must you say the bible was corrupted?

 

[James the Persian]

when some parts say that Jesus is the literal son of God... you take it as is... how do we know which part is unembroidered and which part is not...?

Firstly, what do you mean by the literal son of God? I know from bitter experience that Muslims almost always misinterpret what that means and rarely if ever seem to manage to avoid confusing the begetting of the Son eternally with His Incarnation in time. It's hard to answer your comment when I'm not even sure that it's accurate.

As for who to ask, ask the Church. The Church wrote, collected and preserved not just the Bible but all the rest of Holy Tradition also. It is precisely this that is the problem that I was referring to - you (and most Muslim apologists appear to do the same) are taking a minority view (that of sola scriptura) and attempting to apply it to a majority who reject it. The Bible, interpreted in the context of the Church is very clear - hence why we and the Oriental Orthodox have practically identical faiths despite 1500 years of separation. It's only when you start regarding the text of the Bible as the inerrant Word of God and start relying on personal interpretations rather than the Tradition of the Church that you run into problems.

oh and by "you" I mean christian in general

No, you only think you do. Your comment relies implicitly on the idea that for Christians sola scriptura is the norm, rather than the minority that it actually is. It's a strange position for a Muslim given that you have, in the Hadith, your own interpretative tradition, even though you believe the Quran to be the direct Word of God. Why then is it so difficult to accept that we have similar? Is it just that it makes your attempts at apologetics easier to assume that we are all Protestants, because it often seems that way.

James

 

[Sonic247]

The only ones that were actually contradictions were when it said for example diffrent years of reigns in kings and chronicles. This is because there were diffrent techniques for recording history in Israel and Judah. For instance one would count the instant the king was on the throne as being part of the first year, the other would wait till the following new year to start counting. It was also not an uncommon practice for a kings son to begin reigning with his father when he was still alive (I guess it cold cause problems otherwise, because everyone will want to grab the throne if the kings will isn't established.), some would record this as the begining of his reign and others would only record when he was by himself. The book I posted before explains all the dates.

 

[*Paul*]

4) Matthew 27:9 says the words were spoken by Jeremiah, not written. However let's not ignore proper hebrew. Matthew 27:9 refers to Jeremiah 18:1-4, 19:1-3.

Indeed and if you look at Zecheriahs ministry is it to remind Israel of the things the former prophets had spoken to them:

Zechariah 1:4 Be ye not as your fathers, unto whom the former prophets have cried, saying, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Turn ye now from your evil ways, and from your evil doings: but they did not hear, nor hearken unto me, saith the
LORD.


Zechariah 7:5-7 Speak unto all the people of the land, and to the priests, saying, When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and seventh month, even those seventy years, did ye at all fast unto me, even to me?
And when ye did eat, and when ye did drink, did not ye eat for yourselves, and drink for yourselves? Should ye not hear the words which the LORD hath cried by the former prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and in prosperity, and the cities thereof round about her, when men inhabited the south and the plain?

Zechariah 7:12 Yea, they made their hearts as an adamant stone, lest they should hear the law, and the words which the LORD of hosts hath sent in his spirit by the former prophets: therefore came a great wrath from the LORD of hosts.

 

[benign6]

The only ones that were actually contradictions were when it said for example diffrent years of reigns in kings and chronicles.

These r NOT numbers, what kind of different technique justify God equal to satan?& Footmen equal to horsemen?



(16)I CHRONICLES 21:Satan made David number Israel.No No No it was LORD II SAMUEL 24:1 How could the Almighty God have been the source of these contradictory "INSPIRATIONS?" In which religion is the DEVIL synonymous with GOD?

(21)II SAMUEL10:18:40 Thousand Horsemen -or- Footmen I CHRONICLES 19:18:were killed???

This is because there were diffrent techniques for recording history in Israel and Judah.

So then bible is a history book written from human memory & NOT a word of God???


& what kind of technique difference cause differences like =

• II SAMUEL 24:13:Seven years of famine, I CHRONICLES 21:11:Three years
• II SAMUEL10:18: Seven hundred -or- Seven Thousand I CHRONICLES 19:18:were killed???
• 1 Kings 7:26: 2000 baths in Solomon’s palace -or- 3000 baths: 2 Chronicles 4:5
• 2 Chronicles 9:25:Solomon had 4000 stalls of horses -or- 40,000:1 Kings 4:26

& all reasons u give of different techniques r "MAY BE" without evidence. U r just supposing everything

 

[JayHawes]

These r NOT numbers, what kind of different technique justify God equal to satan?& Footmen equal to horsemen?



(16)I CHRONICLES 21:Satan made David number Israel.No No No it was LORD II SAMUEL 24:1 How could the Almighty God have been the source of these contradictory "INSPIRATIONS?" In which religion is the DEVIL synonymous with GOD?

(21)II SAMUEL10:18:40 Thousand Horsemen -or- Footmen I CHRONICLES 19:18:were killed???

So then bible is a history book written from human memory & NOT a word of God???


& what kind of technique difference cause differences like =

• II SAMUEL 24:13:Seven years of famine, I CHRONICLES 21:11:Three years
• II SAMUEL10:18: Seven hundred -or- Seven Thousand I CHRONICLES 19:18:were killed???
• 1 Kings 7:26: 2000 baths in Solomon’s palace -or- 3000 baths: 2 Chronicles 4:5
• 2 Chronicles 9:25:Solomon had 4000 stalls of horses -or- 40,000:1 Kings 4:26

& all reasons u give of different techniques r "MAY BE" without evidence. U r just supposing everything

Your lack of knowledge about the Bible confounds me. What you dont understand is proper hebrew counting, and true understanding of the Bible. The BIble as a whole the word of God. The Bible then is separtaed into 2 different types of ways:

Section One
1) Law
2) Prophets
3) Psalms and Prophets
4) Gospels
5) Epistles
6) and The Revelation to John

Section Two
1) History
2) Prophecies
3) History/ Prophecy of Jesus
4) Teachings and Doctrines
5) Prophecy

The Bible itself is comprised of much History. I could say the same of the Quran, it is a volume of history concerning the ministry and words of Mohammed. The OT itself was written by many different men, who wrote by inspiration, they though still were men. What is important is that they wrote down what was important, what is not important is liable unpon the person. What should concern you is the vast amount of propehcy recoreded in the bible that have come true. Such as The Holocaus, and Israel being founded in 1948, even Jesus' coming.

You focus on what seems inconsistant, while you could focus on what's consistant, which is in greater number than anything eles. Yet you ignore all things that could convince you that the Bible is the Word of God. Answering the verses II SAMUEL 24:13:Seven years of famine, I CHRONICLES 21:11:Three years.



The book of 2 Samuel was most likely written by Samuel, Nathan, and Gad. They were eye witnesses of what happened during his kingship. 2 Chronicles however, is written by Ezra, later, in and after the exile to Babylon. Ezra had to draw from history, and prophecies given by other prophets including Nathan. KJV translators drew from the Hebrew manuscripts which actually contain this "contradiction" also. However the LXX Manuscripts which are older than the greek manuscripts do not contain this "contradiction." It's all in the choice of manuscripts, someone somewhere made a slip of the pen, dont blame it on God. It all comes down to studying the Original words.

 

[benign6]

What you dont understand is proper hebrew counting,

Please tell me what about this counting i don't understand?

don't blame it on God.

What made u think that???? I NEVER blamed God for these errors !!!!! I blamed ppl who blame God of wrong things.

What you dont understand is proper hebrew counting, and true understanding of the Bible.

I don't have "True" understanding!!! -or- mis-understanding of bible.???? I think i don't have mis-understanding of bible.


For example, i don't mis-understand these verses:-
Christians use such verses to prove Jesus was same as God JN 10:30
Lets take this in context:-
===========================================
John 10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.
JN 10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
JN 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works(miracles) that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
JN 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep(followers), as I said unto you.
JN 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
JN 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
JN 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
JN 10:30 I and my Father are one(in purpose).

======================================
Same one-ness of purpose as given in following verses
======================================

John 17:21 That they all may be one(in purpose); as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee(does this make deciples “gods”, because jesus “ur god” is in them???), that they also may be one in us(so u should have 14 gods, a real God & a jesus god & 12 deciple gods !!!): that the world may believe that thou hast sent me(NOT begotten me).

John 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: (as JN 10:30 I and my Father are one( ONE in purpose)

John 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one(in purpose); and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

 

[JayHawes]

Please tell me what about this counting i don't understand?
What made u think that???? I NEVER blamed God for these errors !!!!! I blamed ppl who blame God of wrong things.
I don't have "True" understanding!!! -or- mis-understanding of bible.???? I think i don't have mis-understanding of bible.


For example, i don't mis-understand these verses:-
Christians use such verses to prove Jesus was same as God JN 10:30
Lets take this in context:-
=========================================== Ge 2:23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.Ge 2:24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
John 10:23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.
JN 10:24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.
JN 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works(miracles) that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
JN 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep(followers), as I said unto you.
JN 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
JN 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
JN 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
JN 10:30 I and my Father are one(in purpose).

======================================
Same one-ness of purpose as given in following verses
======================================

John 17:21 That they all may be one(in purpose); as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee(does this make deciples “gods”, because jesus “ur god” is in them???), that they also may be one in us(so u should have 14 gods, a real God & a jesus god & 12 deciple gods !!!): that the world may believe that thou hast sent me(NOT begotten me).

John 17:22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: (as JN 10:30 I and my Father are one( ONE in purpose)

John 17:23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one(in purpose); and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Let me first type that those are not the main verses we use. Adding your little ( ), does not change the meaning though. (^_^).

When Jesus said "that they all may be one." He was not referring to what you define as purpose. When the bible refers to being "one" it goes back to what Adam declared

Ge 2:23 -And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man

Ge 2:24 -Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

They being two people, are become one flesh. Jesus when referring to the Christians becoming one as he is with God, is referring ot the Body, the Church. He's referring to the saved, those who have accpeted him as their lord, that they may be one Body. The Body may be viewed as how the Church functions.

Ro 12:5 "So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another"

Jesus, being one with God, functions as God. God is; The Father- the judge; The Son- The Word; and the Holy Spirit- The Power. In the same way they function as one, we should focus as one, is what Jesus is saying. Not that we become gods, as you seem to express.


You do have a misunderstanding of the bible. You go off of anti-christian Islamic websites which do not understand the full message and teachings of Christianity. We've seen this in the past when Islam decalred that Christians believed Mary was a part of the Trinity. What you post is very simliar to the things contained on http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac.htm. If you truely wish to discuss these "contradictions." Atleast make the step to truley understand these teachings, dont just go off of what an Islamic site tells you.

 

[JayHawes]

Have you nothing more to say?

 

[benign6]

Let me first type that those are not the main verses we use.

then what r those???

When the bible refers to being "one" it goes back to what Adam declared
........Ge 2:24 -Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Dude ur anology is funny in the sence that Ge 2:24 “shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” refers to having sex !!!!!!What r u trying to prove with this ???

They being two people, are become one flesh. Jesus when referring to the Christians becoming one as he is with God, is referring ot the Body, the Church. He's referring to the saved, those who have accpeted him as their lord, that they may be one Body. The Body may be viewed as how the Church functions.

Ro 12:5 "So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another"

u have given all answers urself!!! ONE IN FUNCTION not in body.

Jesus, being one with God, functions as God.

so god(Jesus) was praying to himself(God) & asking to remove cup(death) from himself ????& many other prayers??? If Jesus was functioning as God then why did he needed prayers??? Because he was a Prophet like all other prophets only with different miracles. & Prayed like all other prophets used to pray to God.

. In the same way they function as one,..

& yes that’s what I said that “I & my Father r one”&" that they may be one, even as we are one" means they were one in the function(purpose) they were performing, guiding ppl back to God teaching.

I always give u pretty simple & logical answers & u ppl always give complicated & twisted replies. U twist the explaination in the way that they suit ur pre-conceived concepts, while those verses r NOT actually saying that.Any un-biased individual can make out their meaning easily.

We've seen this in the past when Islam decalred that Christians believed Mary was a part of the Trinity.

If some individual claimed it ever it was his personal opinion.Christians thenselves r divided over concept of trinity & i heard many saying that they don't have clear concept of trinity. Could u plz post the link where such claim was made by muslim?

What you post is very simliar to the things contained on

www.answering-christianity.com .

I haven't taken anything from this site. I do refer to other islamic scholars but what's the harm in saying the truth again & again.

 

[JayHawes]

then what r those???

1) Dude ur anology is funny in the sence that Ge 2:24 “shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” refers to having sex !!!!!!What r u trying to prove with this ???

u have given all answers urself!!! ONE IN FUNCTION not in body.

so god(Jesus) was praying to himself(God) & asking to remove cup(death) from himself ????& many other prayers??? If Jesus was functioning as God then why did he needed prayers???

Because he was a Prophet like all other prophets only with different miracles. & Prayed like all other prophets used to pray to God.
& yes that’s what I said that “I & my Father r one”&" that they may be one, even as we are one" means they were one in the function(purpose) they were performing, guiding ppl back to God teaching.

I always give u pretty simple & logical answers & u ppl always give complicated & twisted replies. U twist the explaination in the way that they suit ur pre-conceived concepts, while those verses r NOT actually saying that.Any un-biased individual can make out their meaning easily.

If some individual claimed it ever it was his personal opinion.Christians thenselves r divided over concept of trinity & i heard many saying that they don't have clear concept of trinity. Could u plz post the link where such claim was made by muslim?

I haven't taken anything from this site. I do refer to other islamic scholars but what's the harm in saying the truth again & again.

1) Genesis 2:24, is not referring to sex, but marriage (Ephesiand 5:31) My analogy is that we are "married" to God.

2) The fact is that we become ONE BODY, each part has its own fuction, they are not one in fuction. Each part is different, picture the human body, one person may be the hand, another, the head, another the toe. Each has a different fuction, but all are the same Body. The same is for God. The Father is the Head, Jesus is the Tounge, and the Holy Spirit is the Mind.

3) Jesus was not praying to himself. You seem to forget the simple fact that God exists as three. The Father, THe Son and the Holy SPirit. Jesus was praying to God the Father, not to his own person.

4) Jesus was not a prophet like all other Prophets he was the Christ, the Messiah, the savior who was to come. He was the one who was to die for the sins of the world, he was not just a prophet. He prayed becasue he was a man, he gave up all his powers and needed guidance from God in heaven.

5) Christianity is split on the concept of the trinity just as Islam is split between the Sunni and Shi'a, and the Radical and non-radical muslims. No faith, as you seem to claim, agrees on all doctrines and teachings. To some Muslims Allah approves of sacrificial suicide, to others, he does not.