Re: Was Jesus Perfect God and Perfect Man at the Same Time?


"Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:47908b4e$0$24086$afc38c87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"reqluq" <scredcropshonnospam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13p01t5cnkbc07@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Vince Morgan" <vinharAtHereoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:478f3758$0$20842$afc38c87@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[snip]
No I most certainly don't know that. In fact I KNOW very well indeed
that
Al Alah, and her daughters WERE worshipped at Medina at the time of
Mohomad.

So you answered your own earlier question.

But, I did fail to mention previously that she was represented for an age
prior to either the Ottoman empire, or Islam by a crescent moon.
And you above indicate clearly I beleive that you are aware that the moon
god was worshiped at Medina during Mohomad's youth, prior to his travels
to
what was then Palestine. His father worshipped her did he not?
And Archeology plainly shows that the crescent moon was ascociated with
that
worship, long before the "Muslim" Ottomans, and later much of Islam
identified with it.


But, not thereafter. The crescent moon and stars on the spires?
Please
enlighten us.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_do_the_crescent_moon_and_star_mean
" Its origins are not Arabic or Persian and it can not be Islamic due to
the
strict, religious doctrines forbiding the usage of any symbols or the
painting/drawing/sclupting of human faces... these very important
religious
facts are disregarded today by those trying to claim the Moon & Star as
their own today. "

And the police can't be corrupt because that would be against the law.
And politicians can't be corrupt because they write the laws.

But if they are corrupt that doesn't make it right...or a part of being what
a policeman is supposed to be.
stop footsie-ing areound
http://islam.about.com/od/history/a/crescent_moon.htm
" The early Muslim community did not really have a symbol. During the
time
of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), Islamic armies and caravans
flew simple solid-colored flags (generally black, green, or white) for
identification purposes. In later generations, the Muslim leaders
continued
to use a simple black, white, or green flag with no markings, writing, or
symbolism on it... It wasn't until the Ottoman Empire that the crescent
moon
and star became affiliated with the Muslim world. "


And, within the above material we also read;

"The crescent moon and star symbol actually pre-dates Islam by several
thousand years. Information on the origins of the symbol are difficult to
ascertain, but most sources agree that these ancient celestial symbols
were
in use by the peoples of Central Asia and Siberia in their worship of sun,
moon, and sky gods."

Egypt and Babalon should also be added to the above peoples.

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcrescent.html
" In fact, the star and crescent are not (repeat, NOT) official symbols
of
Islam. According to the Hadiths (collection of binding religous
decisions),
it is a sin to use anything as a symbol of Allah (Arabic for "God"). "

Ohhh, so the "God" of Islam has no name?
The Hebrew scriptures contain a name that is a "name" for their "God", as
you seem to be well aware.


Perhaps you need to have a closer look at what you yourself actualy
know, and beleive.
Vince

You need to have a closer look

I assure you, you are either ignorant of this, or you are lying, there
is
no
other position where "facts" are involved.
Please explain to us who Al Alah is then? And, do you know how she was
represented? Crescent moon, stars!

Now you know!! I am not ignorant nor lying..google well before you make
assertions my friend.

My words were strong and did not show the respect that you have above.
For
that you have my apologies.

You are a big man someone else wouldn't hve apologised...apology accepted.

However, Google has a very large collection of links on this and it is a
matter of pick your own flavour in this matter. I don't like links that
are
provided by religious sites of any denomination or faith.

And I don't like links that make up their own assumptions not based on facts
of what the religion actually says. This cannot be guess work..if a muslim
tells you his religion does not worship sun gods etc. then that is it.

I'm sure I don't
need to explain why. Archeology is a more neutral source on such matters
I
think and therefore much more authoritorive. But these works are not
often
openly published on the internet unfortuantely.

http://www.geocities.com/umaximov/moon-god.htm
"The Religion of the Moon

The picture of the Babylonian Moon-God found on a cylinder seal in the
British Museum is from an archeological discovery from the Middle East,
which is now on display at the British Museum. Throughout the Fertile
Crescent from Egypt to Turkey, archeologists have dug up hundreds of
little
idols with a crescent Moon sitting on their head. In ancient pagan
temples,
there are walls with pictures of a god sitting on a throne with a crescent
Moon over his head. At times there are several stars placed near the Moon
to
symbolize the daughters of the Moon god. "

Yes but this hs nothing to do with Islam in it's pure form...remember that.

[snip]
certain. Most hebrew reading people ("the book" was written in hebrew)
believe that the consonants YHWH are pronounced Yahweh. The
consontents
JHVH or YHWH are considered more correct for those that do not speak a
gutteral language (The majority).
Alleluya alleluya
ALLAHlluya ALLAHlluya meaning God be praised see the similaritis buddy?

No it doesn't actualy. You realy blew it here completely
Interesting spelling you have used above. However, the phrase
"hallelujah"
originates from Hebrew.
The name is written over 6000 times in the Hebrew writing and there is no
room whatsoever for the levering it into "Allah" as you are trying to here
I'm afraid. These writings predate Islam by at least 2 thousand years,
but
of course the poor writers needed to wait until Mahomad came along to get
it
right for them?

Well the christian bible in arabic uses Allah for God .


That's what the angels called. In the nt when Jesus as on the cross he
called out ELOi Eloi ....there's that "L" again no "y or W"'s there.
remember Elohim?


You're getting confused between the Word for "God" and a Name that the
Hebrews had for their "God". I expect you may be tempted here to suggest
that as there is only "one" god then the noun "god" can only refer to the
same being, and to be honest, I realy hope you do. My answer will require
you to deny "the gospel" and the words of Jesus whom Muslims believe was
certainly a prophet. Please do.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hallelujah
"hallelujah

1535, from Heb. hallalu-yah "praise Jehovah," from hallalu, pl. imper. of
hallel "to praise" also "song of praise," from hillel "he praised," of
imitative origin, with primary sense being "to trill." Second element is
yah, shortened form of Yahweh, name of God. Replaced variant formation
alleluia (12c.).
"
The spelling you have used above is completely unknown in any works I know
of, or could find. Perhaps you can elucidate?

There just isn't any possible way that "Allah" can be resolved from
these
consontants. The "book" wasn't written by Arabs, remember. The
septuagint,
although a Greek translation, still used the Hebrew consonants so there
is
no room whatsoever for any ambiguity there.

A point that is rarely raised in any material on these matters is the
fact
that in "the book" YHWH made a covenant (contract) with the Hebrews.
Exodus:27 "Write for yourselves these words, for it is in accordance
with
these words that I do conclude a covenent with you (Moses) and Israel."
Now, if YHWH made a contract with Israel, and Islam recognises "the
book"
as
legitimate, when did he break that contract to go to the descendants of
Ishmail instead? Where is the new contract in the Quoran? I don't
see
it
anywhere.
Christianity HAS a covenent. Jesus said on the night before he died
(Islam
says that he didn't realy die, but there is enormous evidence to
support
that he certainly did, and none whatsoever is offered to support the
Islamic
"claim" that he didn't) he said at Mathew 26:28 "...because this means
my
'blood of the covenent' which will be poured out on behalf of many...".
Blood was poured onto the horns of the alter in the case of the
covenent
made with the hebrews. So it was a contract signed in blood in both
cases,
so to speak.

Order the myth of th cross and *was Jesus crucified* by Ahmed Deeat.

"Ahmed Deeat", hmmm, wouldn't be another Muslim trying to further the myth
that Jesus didn't die would he?
Bob the Builder might also have something to say on this, but I couldn't
find anything just now.
As for whether or not it was a cross or a pole, that is irrelevant as to
whether he died or not. Both methods were used by the Romans, who actualy
carried out the execution. This is clearly a Gnostic belief, with a light
twist, that Mohomad picked up during his travels, prior to his return and
consequent claim of devine revelations. Gnostics were quite common in
Arab
lands at that time too.


So, where is Islam's covenent?

The Quoran was written over 400 years after the death of Jesus. One
thing,
amongst others, that is consistent throughout both "the book" and the
"gospels" is that the "prophets" always quoted the words of a previous
"prophet". Jesus quoted the previous "prophets" many many times, and
this
is often used by authorities on the matter to sepperate what is
considered
"authentic" material from what is not. The Quoran quotes none
whatsoever,
and where it "alludes" to something written previously in these books
it
is
never a quote, and very often in error in this respect. That seems
easy
enough to understand as the Quoranic authors evidently hadn't ever read
"the
book" at all! The fact that Mohomad was illiterate would seem to offer
some
understanding of this. And, although those who did the writting
obviously
weren't illiterate in Arabic, they hadn't read "the book" either. ALL
previous "prophets" knew the previous "prophets" writings by heart!
Anyone who reads all these books carefully can easily recognize these
discrepancies in the Quoran.

Do you wonder that when Jesus rebuked Peter for cutting off the ear of
a
man
with the words "those who live by the sword will die by the sword" are
totaly at odds with Mohomad's methods of dealing with anyone who didn't
accept his new religion? For the sake of anyone else reading this, he
put
them to the sword!

So why did he tell them to sell their garments nd buy a sword? He saw he

He did? That is a new one on me. Would you mind offering a reference
from
"the gospel" for us on that?

Luke 22:36: He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy
one...google my friend google..

http://bible.cc/luke/22-36.htm

couldn't win the fight, so wisely he told peter to put the sword
down...and
the fact that peter had a sword means that he understood Jesus' clear
command to buy an actual one..

Strangley enough this is actualy totaly and completely contrary to what is
written in "the gospel". Should I repeat that "the Gospel" is considered
true and Holy by the Quoran?

The original gospel that Jesus spoke; not the eyewitness accounts claimed in
the begining of luke

Mathew26:53
"Or do you think that I cannot appeal to my father to supply me at this
moment more that twelve legions of angels?"
And, paragraph 54 makes it clear Why he did not call for such help.
"In that case, how would the scriptures be fulfilled that it must take
place
this way"?

I think what was written before and is refered to as "Holy" by the Quoran
must be taken as it's own authority, wouldn't you agree? Anything
claiming
to be of the same origin (Holy)would need to be in harmony I would think.
You wouldn't agree?

If someone presents a will or contractual document that claims to
supercede
a previous one it requires more than eloquent writting to establish
it's
authenticity!! Does it not? Fraud is nothing new in religion, and
some
believe that religion is actualy entirely fraudulent, (each to thier
own)
so
anyone actualy wanting to know the truth in these matters needs to
research
all the material very carefully.

The OP made a very good case as reqards the intrigue that was later
"included" into christianity, however he has evidently failed
completely
where his own beliefs are concerned.

Your rebuttals need some meat Reqluq. That's an interesting name by
the
way. You wouldn't be hiding your true identity by chance?

Hiding? never heard of nicknames/screennames bud?

I must respect your right to that, and yes it's certainly very common. I
prefer to identify myself, and don't have a right to demand it of you.
However, "bud" isn't my name, which you have prefered to overlook
apparently.


>If so, what of who are you afraid of? It is far more dangerous to
write
rebuttals of Islam
than otherwise, wouldn't you agree?

Why because I choose a nickname should I be afraid of something? nicks
are
common practise bud...wise up
req

I notice the level of respect you demonstrated toward me earlier
["friend"]
has degenerated somewhat? My intention is not to annoy you actualy, but
to
enlighten you a little.

Vince Morgan

Duly noted, but just because I choose a certain path does not man that I
need to be "enlightened"
You, in my opinion, are giving your opinion on matters, as am I.I'm not
trying to enlighten you; just stating a position. Let's try to keep the
respect/courtesy thingeee going huh?
reqluq


.

Quantcast