Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 203,559

“Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? [...] What does God care what we call him?”

From the desk of Soeren Kern on Fri, 2007-08-24 11:56 Europeans love to mock the salience of religion in American society. via The Brussels Journal

Full Story

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#168516 Mar 19, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You are really as bad as the men, who penned the New Testament and a fool like the men, who came up with absurd doctrines of Christianity.
Treason? You make no sense. Keep in mind that the founders of Christianity never sat in the company of brilliant, wise and scholarly men. You must try to do that now.
I see nothing but foolish comments from you.
Your sins are forgiven.
Jesus claimed to be God in ways that were pretty clear to the people He was talking to. Our problem as 21st century readers, is that we might not easily get what some of Jesus’ sayings actually meant to the people who were part of the conversation.

For example, Jesus also claimed to be divine when He said He was the ”Son of Man.” I’ll admit that the first time I heard this title, I thought it was kind of like Muhammad saying,“I am but a man like you”(Qur’an 41:6)—Now there’s a religious figure who never claimed to be God! But this isn’t what Jesus meant at all. Let’s take a look at the term,“Son of Man.”

Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man
“Son of Man” seems to be Jesus’ favorite thing to call Himself–He uses it 80 times in the New Testament Gospels. Interestingly, it’s only used 1 time outside the gospels (Acts 7:56). So this probably wasn’t something the church made up.
How many modern worship songs can you think of that use the term,“Son of Man?” We know this title didn’t emerge later on in history and it wasn’t written back into the earlier traditions about Jesus. But why is this title important?
Because it’s referring to a figure that Jews recognized as divine. Here’s what the Jewish prophet Daniel wrote (7:13-14):

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
Here’s the point: The “Son of Man” in Daniel’s vision is rightful heir to the divine throne. According to the prophecy, He’ll rule forever. Nations will worship Him and His kingdom will be unstoppable.
Jesus claimed to be the Divine Messiah
The high priest asked him,“Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”“I am,” said Jesus.“And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” The high priest tore his clothes.
“Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked.“You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” They all condemned him as worthy of death.(63-64).
Jesus publicly claimed to be the Messiah. He claimed to be the Son of God. He even used the divine name in His answer:“I AM.” Now, at the very least, Jesus answered,“Yeah, I’m the Messiah. I’m the Son of God.” At that point, the High Priest probably thought something like,“Gotcha!”
Did Jesus Say He Was God?
But then, Jesus follows up with,“I’m also the Son of Man. And you’ll see me seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
That’s when people freaked. Why? Because Jesus basically said,”You know that guy in Daniel’s vision? That’s Me.”
The high priest didn’t misunderstand Him for a second. His response was essentially,“Yikes! You just said you’re God and everyone should worship you!” No ambiguity there. But this just expressed what Jesus already seemed to assume by walking around and doing the things He did.
Things like claiming to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-11, Luke 5:20-24). He certainly didn’t object when people worshiped Him or called Him God (John 20:28-29).

Jesus said He was God
If you’re willing to look at the historical record, you’ll find that there’s a reasonable explanation for the early Christian belief that Jesus was divine: Jesus Himself said He was God. Even people who hated Jesus attest to the fact that this is what He said about Himself.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#168517 Mar 19, 2013
Jesus claimed to be God
in ways that were pretty clear to the people He was talking to. Our problem as 21st century readers, is that we might not easily get what some of Jesus’ sayings actually meant to the people who were part of the conversation.

For example, Jesus also claimed to be divine when He said He was the ”Son of Man.” I’ll admit that the first time I heard this title, I thought it was kind of like Muhammad saying,“I am but a man like you”(Qur’an 41:6)—Now there’s a religious figure who never claimed to be God! But this isn’t what Jesus meant at all. Let’s take a look at the term,“Son of Man.”

Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man
“Son of Man” seems to be Jesus’ favorite thing to call Himself–He uses it 80 times in the New Testament Gospels. Interestingly, it’s only used 1 time outside the gospels (Acts 7:56). So this probably wasn’t something the church made up.

How many modern worship songs can you think of that use the term,“Son of Man?” We know this title didn’t emerge later on in history and it wasn’t written back into the earlier traditions about Jesus. But why is this title important?
Because it’s referring to a figure that Jews recognized as divine. Here’s what the Jewish prophet Daniel wrote (7:13-14):

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

Here’s the point: The “Son of Man” in Daniel’s vision is rightful heir to the divine throne. According to the prophecy, He’ll rule forever. Nations will worship Him and His kingdom will be unstoppable.

Jesus claimed to be the Divine Messiah
The high priest asked him,“Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”“I am,” said Jesus.“And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” The high priest tore his clothes.
“Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked.“You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” They all condemned him as worthy of death.(63-64).

Jesus publicly claimed to be the Messiah. He claimed to be the Son of God. He even used the divine name in His answer:“I AM.” Now, at the very least, Jesus answered,“Yeah, I’m the Messiah. I’m the Son of God.” At that point, the High Priest probably thought something like,“Gotcha!”

Did Jesus Say He Was God?
But then, Jesus follows up with,“I’m also the Son of Man. And you’ll see me seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
That’s when people freaked. Why? Because Jesus basically said,”You know that guy in Daniel’s vision? That’s Me.”

The high priest didn’t misunderstand Him for a second. His response was essentially,“Yikes! You just said you’re God and everyone should worship you!” No ambiguity there. But this just expressed what Jesus already seemed to assume by walking around and doing the things He did.
Things like claiming to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-11, Luke 5:20-24). He certainly didn’t object when people worshiped Him or called Him God (John 20:28-29).

Jesus said He was God
If you’re willing to look at the historical record, you’ll find that there’s a reasonable explanation for the early Christian belief that Jesus was divine: Jesus Himself said He was God. Even people who hated Jesus attest to the fact that this is what He said about Himself.

In Jesus own words Jesus said He was God.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#168518 Mar 19, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>You are blundering around not paying attention to scripture.
The charge against Jesus was "treason" not blasphemy.
Wherever the Jews settled during the time of Roman rule, they had the legal right to execute people under their law.
So then what is the statement in John 18:31 referring to?“From the earliest period the Roman governor took cognizance of all matters that had relation to the public security or the majesty of the Empire. Consequently there was not a time at which the Roman magistrate would not step in when a charge of treason was made, or a seditious movement began. The case against Jesus is one especially in point, for the charge against him [treason] could under no circumstances be tried by any tribunal except that of the governor”(The Prosecution of Jesus).
The Roman government would only intervene in criminal affairs when matters of treason, civil disobedience, incitement to revolution or attacks against Caesar were involved. Otherwise, local administration was conducted by local officials and the regular courts of the conquered nations. Roman authorities were not involved in every criminal proceeding throughout the vast empire.
Jesus’ opponents accused Him of blasphemy, but since they did not want to execute Him themselves, they created charges of treason against Him. This way, the trial could be brought before Pontius Pilate, and, in their minds, he and the Romans would be responsible for Jesus’ death, not them.
You did not pay attention to Scripture.
In this case against Jesus you convicted Him by Muslim mob rule,
just like Muslims kill and Murder under their own mob rule laws.
If you followed Scripture you would have read that the Hews wanted to stone Jesus, but they didn't because of the many followers of Jesus and the knowing of the large crowds the came to listen to Him.
So instead of blasphemy they trumped up false charges of treason which put Jesus under the jurisdiction of the Roman governor.
So you are wrong again.
There is nothing in the Roman archives to show that Pontius Pilate had crucified a man by the name Jesus.

Jesus was loyal and faithful to the Romans. He was a taxpayer and he never raised his voice against the Romans.

You can't trust the History given by the Church. Her history was produced in the 5th Century.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#168519 Mar 19, 2013
Shamma wrote:
Jesus claimed to be God
in ways that were pretty clear to the people He was talking to. Our problem as 21st century readers, is that we might not easily get what some of Jesus’ sayings actually meant to the people who were part of the conversation.
For example, Jesus also claimed to be divine when He said He was the ”Son of Man.” I’ll admit that the first time I heard this title, I thought it was kind of like Muhammad saying,“I am but a man like you”(Qur’an 41:6)—Now there’s a religious figure who never claimed to be God! But this isn’t what Jesus meant at all. Let’s take a look at the term,“Son of Man.”
Jesus claimed to be the Son of Man
“Son of Man” seems to be Jesus’ favorite thing to call Himself–He uses it 80 times in the New Testament Gospels. Interestingly, it’s only used 1 time outside the gospels (Acts 7:56). So this probably wasn’t something the church made up.
How many modern worship songs can you think of that use the term,“Son of Man?” We know this title didn’t emerge later on in history and it wasn’t written back into the earlier traditions about Jesus. But why is this title important?
Because it’s referring to a figure that Jews recognized as divine. Here’s what the Jewish prophet Daniel wrote (7:13-14):
In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
Here’s the point: The “Son of Man” in Daniel’s vision is rightful heir to the divine throne. According to the prophecy, He’ll rule forever. Nations will worship Him and His kingdom will be unstoppable.
Jesus claimed to be the Divine Messiah
The high priest asked him,“Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”“I am,” said Jesus.“And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” The high priest tore his clothes.
“Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked.“You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” They all condemned him as worthy of death.(63-64).
Jesus publicly claimed to be the Messiah. He claimed to be the Son of God. He even used the divine name in His answer:“I AM.” Now, at the very least, Jesus answered,“Yeah, I’m the Messiah. I’m the Son of God.” At that point, the High Priest probably thought something like,“Gotcha!”
Did Jesus Say He Was God?
But then, Jesus follows up with,“I’m also the Son of Man. And you’ll see me seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
That’s when people freaked. Why? Because Jesus basically said,”You know that guy in Daniel’s vision? That’s Me.”
The high priest didn’t misunderstand Him for a second. His response was essentially,“Yikes! You just said you’re God and everyone should worship you!” No ambiguity there. But this just expressed what Jesus already seemed to assume by walking around and doing the things He did.
Things like claiming to forgive sins (Mark 2:5-11, Luke 5:20-24). He certainly didn’t object when people worshiped Him or called Him God (John 20:28-29).
Jesus said He was God
If you’re willing to look at the historical record, you’ll find that there’s a reasonable explanation for the early Christian belief that Jesus was divine: Jesus Himself said He was God. Even people who hated Jesus attest to the fact that this is what He said about Himself.

In Jesus own words Jesus said He was God.
Utter nonsense and balderdash!

Jesus never said, "I am God". Stop lying!

e never said that e was God. I disdain when you write He, Him, His for Jesus. So, from now on,

I will write e for he.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#168520 Mar 19, 2013
Shamma wrote:
Because it’s referring to a figure that Jews recognized as divine. Here’s what the Jewish prophet Daniel wrote (7:13-14):

In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

Here’s the point: The “Son of Man” in Daniel’s vision is rightful heir to the divine throne. According to the prophecy, He’ll rule forever. Nations will worship Him and His kingdom will be unstoppable.
Jesus claimed to be the Divine Messiah
YOU GUYS FOOLISHLY QUOTE DANIEL!

That son of man was brought to the Ancient of Days. So, Jesus was not the Ancient of days.

Please tell this to the ignorant fool, who wrote that article.

I am the Son of Man, you are the Son of Man and every man is the Son of man. Son of man, simply means MAN!

In the verse that you quoted, it is written "son of man". Writing it as Son of Man does not make it any special.

Son of Man has not been patented for Jesus.
John

Brisbane, Australia

#168521 Mar 19, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing in the Roman archives to show that Pontius Pilate had crucified a man by the name Jesus.
Jesus was loyal and faithful to the Romans. He was a taxpayer and he never raised his voice against the Romans.
You can't trust the History given by the Church. Her history was produced in the 5th Century.
The "Roman archives"???
Bwahhahhahhahhah!!!
You get stupider every day.
The archives of imperial Rome were destroyed in the 6th century along with the western empire.
And why do keep repeating the lie that Christianity was was invented in the 5th century when you have been shown the proof that the books of the new testament go back to the 1st century?
Your lies make you look cowardly and stupid.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#168522 Mar 19, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing in the Roman archives to show that Pontius Pilate had crucified a man by the name Jesus.
Jesus was loyal and faithful to the Romans. He was a taxpayer and he never raised his voice against the Romans.
You can't trust the History given by the Church. Her history was produced in the 5th Century.
You full of lies.
I posted the evidence month ago.
The first physical evidence relating to Pilate was discovered in 1961, when a block of limestone, the Pilate Stone, was found in the Roman theatre at Caesarea Maritima, the capital of the province of Judaea (Iudaea). Bearing a damaged dedication by Pilate of a Tiberieum,[14] the dedication states that he was [...]ECTVS IUDA[...](usually read as praefectus Iudaeae), that is, prefect of Judaea. The early governors of Judaea were of prefect rank, the later were of procurator rank, beginning with Cuspius Fadus in AD 44. The inscription was discovered by a group led by Antonio Frova and has been dated to AD 26–37. The inscription is currently housed in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem, while a replica stands at Caesarea

All the evidence is there in history.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#168523 Mar 19, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
There is nothing in the Roman archives to show that Pontius Pilate had crucified a man by the name Jesus.
Jesus was loyal and faithful to the Romans. He was a taxpayer and he never raised his voice against the Romans.
You can't trust the History given by the Church. Her history was produced in the 5th Century.
We know. That is why the charge against Jesus was trumped by the Jews.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#168524 Mar 19, 2013
A Muslims journey to Jesus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168525 Mar 20, 2013
The real translation of Daniel
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt3407.htm

13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the Ancient of days, and he was brought near before Him.

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.{P

-----
the term "son of man" notice - no caps - is "enos atah chave" literally "man of life"

Its Aramaic, by the way

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168526 Mar 20, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
Where is there slaughtering in the name of Christianity going on? Notice the present tense?
If you look back to my original post, I used the past tense - I was referring to the Crusades.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168527 Mar 20, 2013
John wrote:
<quoted text>
Horseshit.
Christian civilisation is way less bloodthirsty than either its predecessor or others in the world today.
Sure, ignore the Crusades....

and the Inquisition....

and there were more than a Christians who supported the Nazis, including the Vatican (and the last pope)
John

Australia

#168528 Mar 20, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
The real translation of Daniel
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt3407.htm
13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a son of man, and he came even to the Ancient of days, and he was brought near before Him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.{P
-----
the term "son of man" notice - no caps - is "enos atah chave" literally "man of life"
Its Aramaic, by the way
Quibbling.
John

Australia

#168529 Mar 20, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, ignore the Crusades....
and the Inquisition....
and there were more than a Christians who supported the Nazis, including the Vatican (and the last pope)
Crusades - a good counter offensive against islam.
The Inquisition - a good purge of muztards from spain.
The Nazis - Hitler was a muztard admiring fascist who was overthrown by Christian armies.
No problem here.
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#168530 Mar 20, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
If you look back to my original post, I used the past tense - I was referring to the Crusades.
So: Where is there slaughtering in the name of Christianity going on?

Also: Where is there slaughtering in the name of allah going on?
Paul WV

Beckley, WV

#168531 Mar 20, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
It stopped only in the late 19th Century after a period of many centuries.
However in the 20th Century, the Christians started two wars, known as WWII and killed millions of their own co-religionists.
During those wars, the Holy Spirit ran away from the world.
As were the crusades, WWII was a defensive war against a barbaric aggressor. islam has always been the aggressor in Islamic wars. Muslims stole the land from the native people and enslaved or killed them if they did not convert of islam.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168532 Mar 20, 2013
John wrote:
<quoted text>
Crusades - a good counter offensive against islam.
The Inquisition - a good purge of muztards from spain.
The Nazis - Hitler was a muztard admiring fascist who was overthrown by Christian armies.
No problem here.
As a Jew, I find that revisionist view of history offensive.

And the armies that overthrew Hitler were no more "Christian" than Hitler himself.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168533 Mar 20, 2013
John wrote:
<quoted text>
Quibbling.
so then you must agree that the term is son not "Son" and that it is a literary figure of speech, not a theology??

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#168534 Mar 20, 2013
Paul WV wrote:
<quoted text>
So: Where is there slaughtering in the name of Christianity going on?
For the second time - Straw argument

But if I was going to make that argument in the present tense (which I havent until now) I would probably direct you to countries like India and Lebanon where everyone hates everyone else.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#168535 Mar 20, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure, ignore the Crusades....
and the Inquisition....
and there were more than a Christians who supported the Nazis, including the Vatican (and the last pope)
rabbee: do you have a perverted ulterior motive, about the way G-D is telling this whole story to happen? just why did G-D, command it all to happen this way? maybe jews* are not as pretty of a picture, as they self paint of themselves.

they whine, complain, and moan, over what is also their own fault for disbelief of G-D, here and now in TheTorah. and the whole rest of the world, must be doing something wrong also, to be getting this much hell from G-D. as the jews* remain silent about it, without G-D.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pagan/Wiccan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bloomfield woman behind Ten Commandments monume... Oct 10 Liam R 3
Wiccan Arrested on Child Rape Charges (Apr '10) Oct 9 Lee County NC 46
I...(gulp) am a Pagan Agnostic Taoist Sep 28 Ol Fuddy Duddy 2
Respecting belief: why should you? And why shou... Sep '14 thetruth 21
Pagan caught performing naked ritual with teena... (Nov '12) Sep '14 Kathwynn 14
Who exactly was Gjoub, and should I trust him? (Mar '09) Sep '14 Kathwynn 503
SHADOW PEOPLE... i need help (May '07) Aug '14 Only1Likeme212 347

Pagan/Wiccan People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE