Essential features of the apostle of God

[Downhome_Woman]

I don't know that any of this is worth an argument. But it certainly makes no sense to me that God would tell the world in two allegedly Holy Books that Israel through the House of David would be the Source of salvation without giving a hint that he would change course and go on to another of Abraham's seed in order to fulfill this pledge. This especially so when those purported Holy Books claim to be plenary inspiration. As we Yanks say, that is changing the horse in mid-stream and it has no logic and makes not the slightest sense.

But if that is what eanasser wishes to believe, fine. But his beliefs are not binding on me or anyone else without some actual proof.

Yup - you're correct - his beliefs aren't binding on you at all, but if he had his way and Islam rules supreme, his deity (ok - via the hordes of doom) would smite you big time for your non belief - or make you pay a hefty fine and wear ugly clothing (oops - sorry - that's only if you were a person of the book - heathens would indeed be smoted)

 

[Cliffy]

I've never been smoted. What does that entail?

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I've never been smoted. What does that entail?

A great deal of uncomfortable smotation - usually harmful to the resperatory system.

 

[Spade]

A great deal of uncomfortable smotation - usually harmful to the resperatory system.

Time to haul out the old gods. The desert myths no longer cut it.

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I've never been smoted. What does that entail?

But then again, having never experienced it myself - being that I live in a secular land, I'm only going by Einasser's word and what I've read ... well ... Who knows what it's REALLY like - and just HOW or WHY would one choose djimitude or smitage? ...ahh .. a mystery ...

 

[Downhome_Woman]

Time to haul out the old gods. The desert myths no longer cut it.

Meh - they all smoted to one extent or another. And you're going to have to specify just WHAT older gods you want to bring out of the closet before I commit! :roll:

 

[Francis2004]

Time to haul out the old gods. The desert myths no longer cut it.

I prefer desserts... :lol:

 

[Spade]

I prefer desserts... :lol:

But they must be just!

 

[Francis2004]

But they must be just!

Of course..

 

[Spade]

Meh - they all smoted to one extent or another. And you're going to have to specify just WHAT older gods you want to bring out of the closet before I commit! :roll:

Any anthropomorphic representation of the Unknowable is just human invention.

 

[Cliffy]

Any anthropomorphic representation of the Unknowable is just human invention.

I like the term "the all that is". pretty much covers everything without anthropomorphizing anything. And no smoting involved! Ya gotta love it!

 

[gopher]

I smote, therefore I am ... smoting gopher:

 

[eanassir]

I don't know that any of this is worth an argument. But it certainly makes no sense to me that God would tell the world in two allegedly Holy Books that Israel through the House of David would be the Source of salvation without giving a hint that he would change course and go on to another of Abraham's seed in order to fulfill this pledge. This especially so when those purported Holy Books claim to be plenary inspiration. As we Yanks say, that is changing the horse in mid-stream and it has no logic and makes not the slightest sense.

But if that is what eanasser wishes to believe, fine. But his beliefs are not binding on me or anyone else without some actual proof.

I tell you this:
Is God obliged to confine His favor of making any prophet out of all mankind?

In other words, the kingdom and possession belong to God and all people are His created servants; then there were many prophets before Abraham; but because Abraham was loyal to God and he prayed Him to make out of his seed the religious leaders of mankind, then God gave him that promise, with exception: His promise will not include the wrong-doers among his seed.​

So a large number of prophets proceded from his seeds, but not all the prophets are essentially out of Abraham's seed. In fact God sent His apostles to all nations and to all peoples, even to remote and isolated Islands; and not all these apostles were Abrahams's descendents. And evenso there was a large number of prophets and apostles out of his seed.​

In like manner, later on the prophet-hood and the monarchy were to be out of certain tribes of Israel; but this was not an obligation.​

E.g. their first king Saul was not of the descence of the monarchy tribe; but because he was giant in body and God gave him knowledge and the kingdom inspite of them.​

Moreover, another one coming from the branch of Jessie was to rule; then David gathered the prophet-hood and the monarchy in one person.​

Therefore, the favor is by the hand of God; none can object to Him; and He will not choose His adversaries to give them guidance and prophet-hood, even after they killed His prophets and worshipped the idols, and till now (see in this forum and other sites; it is they that spread and defend the Evolution theory and the atheism.)​

[The interpretation is according to the late interpreter of the Quran and the Bible: the inspired Mohammed-Ali Hassan Al-Hilly - may God's mercy and peace be on his soul]

This is in the Quran 57: 29 ​

لِئَلَّا يَعْلَمَ أَهْلُ الْكِتَابِ أَلَّا يَقْدِرُونَ عَلَى شَيْءٍ مِّن فَضْلِ اللَّهِ وَأَنَّ الْفَضْلَ بِيَدِ اللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَن يَشَاء وَاللَّهُ ذُو الْفَضْلِ الْعَظِيمِ​

The explanation:

Then God addressed the Muslims, with this aya:​

([We have shifted the revelation from Jews to you: the Arab; because of their association, unbelief and stubbornness]; ​

so that [Jews] the people of the Bible [lit. Scripture] may know not from now on [anything of the revelation], ​

[and they should know] that they have no control over anything of God's bounty [to prevent the revelation from reaching the Arab], ​

and that the bounty [of sending the revelation down] is [entirely] by the hand of God; He gives it to whomsoever [of His servants] He will; and God is of abounding bounty [to His prophets and messengers.])​

http://www.quran-ayat.com/
quran-ayat.com/​

 

[Downhome_Woman]

I tell you this:
Is God obliged to confine His favor of making any prophet out of all mankind?

In other words, the kingdom and possession belong to God and all people are His created servants; then there were many prophets before Abraham; but because Abraham was loyal to God and he prayed Him to make out of his seed the religious leaders of mankind, then God gave him that promise, with exception: His promise will not include the wrong-doers among his seed.​

So a large number of prophets proceded from his seeds, but not all the prophets are essentially out of Abraham's seed. In fact God sent His apostles to all nations and to all peoples, even to remote and isolated Islands; and not all these apostles were Abrahams's descendents. And evenso there was a large number of prophets and apostles out of his seed.​

In like manner, later on the prophet-hood and the monarchy were to be out of certain tribes of Israel; but this was not an obligation.​

E.g. their first king Saul was not of the descence of the monarchy tribe; but because he was giant in body and God gave him knowledge and the kingdom inspite of them.​

Moreover, another one coming from the branch of Jessie was to rule; then David gathered the prophet-hood and the monarchy in one person.​

Therefore, the favor is by the hand of God; none can object to Him; and He will not choose His adversaries to give them guidance and prophet-hood, even after they killed His prophets and worshipped the idols, and till now (see in this forum and other sites; it is they that spread and defend the Evolution theory and the atheism.)​

[The interpretation is according to the late interpreter of the Quran and the Bible: the inspired Mohammed-Ali Hassan Al-Hilly - may God's mercy and peace be on his soul]

This is in the Quran 57: 29 ​

لِئَلَّا يَعْلَمَ أَهْلُ الْكِتَابِ أَلَّا يَقْدِرُونَ عَلَى شَيْءٍ مِّن فَضْلِ اللَّهِ وَأَنَّ الْفَضْلَ بِيَدِ اللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَن يَشَاء وَاللَّهُ ذُو الْفَضْلِ الْعَظِيمِ​

The explanation:

Then God addressed the Muslims, with this aya:​

([We have shifted the revelation from Jews to you: the Arab; because of their association, unbelief and stubbornness]; ​

so that [Jews] the people of the Bible [lit. Scripture] may know not from now on [anything of the revelation], ​

[and they should know] that they have no control over anything of God's bounty [to prevent the revelation from reaching the Arab], ​

and that the bounty [of sending the revelation down] is [entirely] by the hand of God; He gives it to whomsoever [of His servants] He will; and God is of abounding bounty [to His prophets and messengers.])​

http://www.quran-ayat.com/
quran-ayat.com/​

Oh good grief yet again,
your statements,'E.g. their first king Saul was not of the descence of the monarchy tribe; but because he was giant in body and God gave him knowledge and the kingdom inspite of them."
At that time there was no 'MONARCHY' tribe. Saul was the first 'king' - there was no actual 'ruling' family.
Tell you why, why don't you stop relying on Islamic writings in order to discuss Jewish history and religion. It's tanamount to listening to gossip - it's second and third hand. Besides, it's written by people who rather than build their own religion or cultivate their own culture, have decided to co-op someone else's.

 

[eanassir]

Oh good grief yet again,
your statements,'E.g. their first king Saul was not of the descence of the monarchy tribe; but because he was giant in body and God gave him knowledge and the kingdom inspite of them."
At that time there was no 'MONARCHY' tribe. Saul was the first 'king' - there was no actual 'ruling' family.

It was decided before that the priests will be of Aaron's sons, and the kingdom to Juda's sons , and the prophets in Levy's sons; so that they objected to Saul because he was of Benjamin's line.

Tell you why, why don't you stop relying on Islamic writings in order to discuss Jewish history and religion. It's tanamount to listening to gossip - it's second and third hand. Besides, it's written by people who rather than build their own religion or cultivate their own culture, have decided to co-op someone else's.

So if you know the history and religion, then tell us what is the punishment of the theif according to Jacob: Israel and his sons on one hand, and the punishment of the theif according to the Torah of Ezra?

 

[Downhome_Woman]

Einassir - there is no 'Torah of Ezra'. There is the Torah (for Christians, The New Testament)and generally refers to the first 5 books of Moses.
Now, as far as your statement, "tell us what is the punishment of the theif according to Jacob: Israel and his sons on one hand, and the punishment of the theif according to the Torah of Ezra?"
Can you tell me where this actually appears in Ezra? I've done a run through and I can't find it. I can find how the princes of Israel were told to give up their foreign wives -but thieves? Maybe it's due to my failing eyesight ...

 

[weaselwords]

essential features blind faith
obstinance
proselytsing zeal
certain knowledge of the correctness of your position
All this has probably been noted previouslyhowever I didn't want go thru 15 pages of posts to find out I'm just parrotting previous arguements. Oh yeah one last thing others must accept your views & convert on penalty of death

 

[Cliffy]

essential features blind faith
obstinance
proselytsing zeal
certain knowledge of the correctness of your position
All this has probably been noted previouslyhowever I didn't want go thru 15 pages of posts to find out I'm just parrotting previous arguements. Oh yeah one last thing others must accept your views & convert on penalty of death

That's right. So wise up or burn in the lake of fire.;-)

 

[gopher]

''why don't you stop relying on Islamic writings in order to discuss Jewish history and religion. It's tanamount to listening to gossip - it's second and third hand. Besides, it's written by people who rather than build their own religion or cultivate their own culture, have decided to co-op someone else's.''


The point being that if the Bible is plenary, and if Muslims accept it as Divinely inspired truth with Jesus as Messiah, then there is no further need for prophets. As promised in the Torah, all the revelations needed by mankind for salvation have been given in the Old & New Testaments. In fact, the Book of Revelations deals with end time issues and the solutions for averting it or for salvation that may save one from it.

On that basis, why on earth is another book of revelation needed??

Again, this defies logic but if this is what Muslims which to believe in, that's their right I suppose.

 

[eanassir]

Einassir - there is no 'Torah of Ezra'. There is the Torah (for Christians, The New Testament)and generally refers to the first 5 books of Moses.
Now, as far as your statement, "tell us what is the punishment of the theif according to Jacob: Israel and his sons on one hand, and the punishment of the theif according to the Torah of Ezra?"
Can you tell me where this actually appears in Ezra? I've done a run through and I can't find it. I can find how the princes of Israel were told to give up their foreign wives -but thieves? Maybe it's due to my failing eyesight ...

The Torah or the Hebrew Bible was written by the priest Ezra following thier return from the captivity of Babylon; the original Torah which had been kept in the temple at Jerusalem had been torn up and burnt by Nabuchodonosor.

So when they returned to Palestine after the 70 years in the bondage of Nabuchodonosor, they had no Torah, then the Priest Ezra rewrote it for them.

<quran-ayat.com/conflict/index.htm#The_Torah_[or_Hebrew_Bible]_of_Ezra_>

The Hebrew Torah now available is this Torah of Ezra; the original Torah of God had been lost as have just been explained.

The Old Testament includes most of this Hebrew Torah, after passing into many translations to Greek and Lattin then to English and other languages.

Now, I tell you the punishment of the thief according to Jacob and his sons: the theif will be a slave to the one from whom he stole; i.e. if a thief steals something from a man, then the thief will be a slave to that man.

E.g. Joseph's aunt liked him very much; so she made a trick to keep Joseph with her: she accused him of stealing a statue from her, then she kept him with her. Actually, Joseph was a child and he took that statue to play with; and in fact that statue belonged to his mother. The story is known very well.

Another example: Josephe kept his brother Benjamin with him, by doing a similar trick : he put the gold measure of the king in the bag of Benjamin, then accused him of stealing it; and so he took his brother from the other brethren.

Because according to the king of Egypt, the punishment was to imprison the thief and not to eslave him. And you can read the story in the Book of Genesis.

In the Quran 12:
69-79

وَلَمَّا دَخَلُواْ عَلَى يُوسُفَ آوَى إِلَيْهِ أَخَاهُ قَالَ إِنِّي أَنَاْ أَخُوكَ فَلاَ تَبْتَئِسْ بِمَا كَانُواْ يَعْمَلُونَ . فَلَمَّا جَهَّزَهُم بِجَهَازِهِمْ جَعَلَ السِّقَايَةَ فِي رَحْلِ أَخِيهِ ثُمَّ أَذَّنَ مُؤَذِّنٌ أَيَّتُهَا الْعِيرُ إِنَّكُمْ لَسَارِقُونَ . قَالُواْ وَأَقْبَلُواْ عَلَيْهِم مَّاذَا تَفْقِدُونَ . قَالُواْ نَفْقِدُ صُوَاعَ الْمَلِكِ وَلِمَن جَاء بِهِ حِمْلُ بَعِيرٍ وَأَنَاْ بِهِ زَعِيمٌ . قَالُواْ تَاللّهِ لَقَدْ عَلِمْتُم مَّا جِئْنَا لِنُفْسِدَ فِي الأَرْضِ وَمَا كُنَّا سَارِقِينَ . قَالُواْ فَمَا جَزَآؤُهُ إِن كُنتُمْ كَاذِبِينَ . قَالُواْ جَزَآؤُهُ مَن وُجِدَ فِي رَحْلِهِ فَهُوَ جَزَاؤُهُ كَذَلِكَ نَجْزِي الظَّالِمِينَ . فَبَدَأَ بِأَوْعِيَتِهِمْ قَبْلَ وِعَاء أَخِيهِ ثُمَّ اسْتَخْرَجَهَا مِن وِعَاء أَخِيهِ كَذَلِكَ كِدْنَا لِيُوسُفَ مَا كَانَ لِيَأْخُذَ أَخَاهُ فِي دِينِ الْمَلِكِ إِلاَّ أَن يَشَاء اللّهُ نَرْفَعُ دَرَجَاتٍ مِّن نَّشَاء وَفَوْقَ كُلِّ ذِي عِلْمٍ عَلِيمٌ . قَالُواْ إِن يَسْرِقْ فَقَدْ سَرَقَ أَخٌ لَّهُ مِن قَبْلُ فَأَسَرَّهَا يُوسُفُ فِي نَفْسِهِ وَلَمْ يُبْدِهَا لَهُمْ قَالَ أَنتُمْ شَرٌّ مَّكَانًا وَاللّهُ أَعْلَمْ بِمَا تَصِفُونَ . قَالُواْ يَا أَيُّهَا الْعَزِيزُ إِنَّ لَهُ أَبًا شَيْخًا كَبِيرًا فَخُذْ أَحَدَنَا مَكَانَهُ إِنَّا نَرَاكَ مِنَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ . قَالَ مَعَاذَ اللّهِ أَن نَّأْخُذَ إِلاَّ مَن وَجَدْنَا مَتَاعَنَا عِندَهُ إِنَّـآ إِذًا لَّظَالِمُونَ​

The explanation:
(And when they went in before Joseph, he received his brother [Benjamin] privately and said: "Truly I am your brother; so grieve not over their past doing."

Then, when he had provided them with their provision, he put the [gold] drinking-cup [of the king] in the saddle-bag of his brother [Benjamin], then a crier cried: "O men in the caravan, you are thieves."

They said, turning towards them: "What is it that you miss?"

They said: "We have missed the king's cup, and he who brings it shall have a camel-load, and I [said Joseph] guaranty it."

[Joseph's brothers] said: "By God! you know well that we come not [here] to make mischief in the land, nor did we steal before."

[The king's pages] said: "And what shall be the penalty for it, if you prove liars?"

They said: "The penalty thereof is he in whose bag [the cup] is found – he shall be [a slave as] the penalty thereof; thus do we reward wrong-doers."

Then he began [the search] with their sacks before his brother's sack, then he brought it out of his brother's sack.

Thus did We contrive for Joseph; he could not have taken his brother according to the king's law [which decides the prison for the thief] unless God willed.

We raise by ranks [anyone] whom We will, and above everyone with knowledge there is the All-Knowing [Lord.]

They said: "In case he has stolen now, a brother of his own had stolen before!" [They meant by that the story of Joseph when he was accused by stealing the statue]

Joseph kept it secret within himself and did not disclose it to them; he said: "You are the worst in case you have power!" But God knows best the truth of what you allege."

They said: "O exalted prince, he has a very old father [Jacob], so take one of us in his stead; [for] we see that you are pious."

[Joseph] said: "I seek refuge in God that we should take anyone save whom we find our property with. Otherwise we are wrong-doers.")​

While Ezra lived in Babylon and the law of Babylon said that the theif who steals a cow, let him give four cows; so he wrote that in his Torah, while the original statement in the original Torah was like the statement in the Quran: to cut off the hand of the thief; but Satan came to Ezra and said to him: this is very cruel for the poor thief; let us make it the thief who steals one cow let him give 4 cows.

But they did not know that the punishment of the thief by cutting off his hand is to prevent any thief from stealing; moreover, if the thief steals one cow, how can he pay 4 cows? – Abu abd-Allah said.