Mohammedism Versus The Living God Of Israel

[Guest shiloh357]

9 hours ago, Knowingtruth said:

Right, NT doesn't cancel out the OT. But it is like coming out of the shadow to brilliant light. It is the spiritual fulfillment of the OT which is applicable to all. Jesus fulfilled the letter of the Law. The OT rituals are no longer of importance since it is no longer the letter of the Law but spirit of the Law that is applicable to all--Jews and Gentiles.

Part of the problem with your argument is that you are trying to refute arguments that we are not raising.   You are responding to us as if we favor Jews over other people and we don't.   You are blinded by assumptions about us that are simply not true and you are filtering what we are saying through those wrong assumptions.    It makes it near impossible to have a reasonable discussion with because of that.   We are not against what you just said, but you are trying to have a conversation that the rest of us are not having. 

[Guest shiloh357]

9 hours ago, Knowingtruth said:

I am a believer in Jesus Christ and His words.

Okay, but what about the rest of the New Testament?   Do you see the rest of the New Testament as God's word and just as important as the Gospel accounts of Jesus and His words?

[other one]

9 hours ago, Knowingtruth said:

Luke can be trusted more than Paul since he doesn't brag of special revelation to him like Paul. Both Luke and Paul were not aware of the symbolic significance of calling twelve by Jesus. I reiterate again that Jesus never called Paul an apostle. 

I would disagree with that....    the 11 decided on their own to draw lots for someone to replace Judas, and I say that Jesus picked Paul to replace him by picking Paul the way he did.

[Knowingtruth]

4 hours ago, RobertS said:

Luke's account in Acts calls Paul an apostle:

"But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM. " (Acts 14:14-15, NASB, emphasis mine)

 

The Greek word used for "apostle" in that verse is apostoloi,  which is where we get the word "apostle" from; it means " one sent on a mission, an apostle" (Strong's 652). And it says "apostles" in all the translations of scripture (NIV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, ASV, KJ2K, NLT, ESV etc.). You can see for yourself: http://biblehub.com/acts/14-14.htm

 

Now, let's take a look at Revelation 2:2, which is what you're probably referring to:

" I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot tolerate evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false" (Revelation 2:2, NASB, emphasis mine)

This makes not even the slightest reference to "anyone outside the 12; John was describing that there had been those claiming to be apostles, but were not. it's a considerable stretch from "call themselves apostles, but were not", to "anyone outside the 12 are fakes". Acts records Paul's calling, calls him an Apostle, Peter calls him an apostle, the council at Jerusalem did not refute his apostleship, and nowhere in scripture in any book, Pauline or otherwise, is Paul ever discounted as an apostle or ever regarded but as an apostle. The thing is though: denigrating Paul's authority as an apostle is a common tactic Muslims use to try to wedge Islam in as an "authentic" religion. In this case, attempting to "shoehorn" it into place with the gospels and removing Paul's "pesky" letters. But in the Qur'an, Surah 61:14 says:

"O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah: as said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, "Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?" Said the Disciples, "We are Allah's helpers!" then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, and they became the ones that prevailed." (Qur'an, Surah 61:14)

On that note: the respected Islamic commentator Al-Qurtubi grants the apostleship of Paul while commenting on Surah 61:14:

“It was said that this verse was revealed about the apostles of Jesus, may peace and blessing be upon him. Ibn Ishaq stated that of the apostles and disciples that Jesus sent (to preach) there were Peter and Paul who went to Rome; Andrew and Matthew who went to the land of the cannibals; Thomas who went to Babel in the eastern lands; Philip who went to Africa; John went to Dac-sos(?) which is the tribe to whom the sleepers of the cave belonged; Jacob went to Jerusalem; Bartholomew went to the lands of Arabia, specifically Al-Hijaz; Simon who went to the Barbarians; Judas and Barthas(?) who went to Alexandria and its surrounding regions.”( Tafsir Al-Qurtubi, 61:14 )

 

Now, I want to address another accusation that I'm sure will probably come up, and before we go down the "Ebionite" road, let's cut that one off at the pass. For those who do not know: this is a tactic used by Muslims to discredit Paul. Their supposed "point is that a sect called the "Ebionites" that rejected Paul and claimed that they were "sanctioned by the Apostle James". But one problem is that the Ebionites held to various heresies that discount their credibility; in particular, there is one that is recorded by Origen in his work Against Celsus (248 AD). Here, we find out that multiple sects of Ebionites existed at the time, and many of those  took to  denying Jesus' virgin birth: “… the twofold sect of Ebionites, who either acknowledge with us that Jesus was born of a virgin, or deny this, and maintain that He was begotten like other human beings.”( Origen, Against Celsus, Book 5, Ch. 61 ). This, along with another heresy claiming that Jesus "came as Adam" casts a considerable amount of doubt on their credibility on anything, let alone the apostolic authority of Paul. But then we discover what they actually said about him; Epiphanius records the charge they leveled against Paul:

"[The Ebionites] declare that he [Paul] was a Greek [...] He went up to Jerusalem, they say, and when he had spent some time there, he was seized with a passion to marry the daughter of the priest. For this reason he became a proselyte and was circumcised. Then, when he failed to get the girl, he flew into a rage and wrote against circumcision and against the sabbath and the Law." ( Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, 30.16.6-9 )

We begin to see a smear campaign is in effect against Paul by the Ebionites.

While it was reported in the 4^th century by Epiphanius, the claim originated in an earlier piece written by the Ebionite, named The Ascents of James. Said piece was dated to between 150-200 AD by Dr. Georg Strecker and Dr. Robert Van Voorst, placing their accusation well past Paul's lifetime and out of serious consideration for modern scholarship. To make matters worse, they confirmed it as having been written in Pella (Northwest Jordan, about 17 miles south of the Sea of Galilee), which was completely south of Paul's operating area. Backing the research done by the good doctors, authors Bruce Chilton and Jacob Neusner note in their book The Brother of Jesus: James the Just and his Mission, that Dr. Strecker's and Dr.Van Voorst's findings are the “consensus view on the date and place of origin of the Ascents…” (Bruce Chilton and Jacob Neusner, The Brother of Jesus: James the Just and his Mission, 2001, p. 37 ). This indicates that the no one with any credentials in the field has reason to believe that the Ebionite work was written during Paul's lifetime.

Lastly, the Ebionites were not above even altering scripture, going so far as to alter the Gospel of Mark to suit their twisted views, as Epiphanius reports: "“And the Lord himself says, ‘Go ye into the city, and ye shall find a man bearing a pitcher of water and ye shall follow whithersoever he goeth, and say ye to the Goodman of the house, Where is the guest-chamber, where I shall keep the Passover with my disciples? And he shall show you an upper room furnished; there make ready.’ But the Lord says in turn, ‘With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you.’ And he said, ‘this Passover,’ not simply ‘Passover,” so that no one would practice it in accordance with his own notion. Passover, as I said, was roast meat and the rest. But of their own will these people have lost sight of the consequence of the truth, and have altered the wording-which is evident to everyone from the sayings associated with it-and made the disciples say, ‘Where wilt thou that we prepare for three to eat the Passover?’ And the Lord, if you please, says, ‘Have I desired meat with desire, to eat this Passover with you?’”" ( Mark 14:12-15, altered version, Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion, 30. 22. 1-4 emphasis mine )

 

So, we can see here that scripture confirms Paul's status as an Apostle; his own letters confirm his apostleship, Peter confirms it as well, and even the Qur'an and it's early commentators do so as well. As for any accusations of Paul's character or apostleship, the Ebionite charge falls flat by the wayside.

 

 

Luke cannot be a person to endorse the apostleship of Paul. Both Paul and Luke were rank outsiders of Jesus' ministry. Both never knew the purpose of picking up only twelve out of several disciples by Jesus. Peter or any other apostle never called Paul an apostle. That is your assumption. Apostleship is not based on secular dictionary definition. No wonder all kinds of Tom, Dick and Harry are calling themselves as apostles nowadays! Your argument to defend Paul cost amounts to questioning the wisdom of the Lord in choosing only twelve since there were only twelve tribes.

Islamic commentator Al-Qurtubi puts Paul along with other apostles under the category of apostles and disciples. He doesn't recognize Paul as an apostle exclusively. Paul was definitely a disciple of Jesus and a chosen vessel. John indicates there are only twelve foundations of apostles in heaven. Where does Paul sit? On the lap of Peter?

Quote

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Knowingtruth]

1 hour ago, shiloh357 said:

Okay, but what about the rest of the New Testament?   Do you see the rest of the New Testament as God's word and just as important as the Gospel accounts of Jesus and His words?

Paul indicates in some places that it is his concession and not a commandment of the Lord. Peter wrote that Paul wrote according to his wisdom. Who, meanwhile, accepted all of the NT is God's words? Jesus' words are of paramount importance. I accept all writings that complement Lord's preaching.

[Knowingtruth]

1 hour ago, other one said:

I would disagree with that....    the 11 decided on their own to draw lots for someone to replace Judas, and I say that Jesus picked Paul to replace him by picking Paul the way he did.

Peter explains the reason to fill up the vacant apostleship with the death of Judas. Remember Jesus had given them the Holy Spirit even before the Pentecost for continuing with His ministry in His physical absence. Sure, Jesus picked up Paul as a chosen vessel, not as apostle.

[hmbld]

12 hours ago, Knowingtruth said:

Luke can be trusted more than Paul since he doesn't brag of special revelation to him like Paul. Both Luke and Paul were not aware of the symbolic significance of calling twelve by Jesus. I reiterate again that Jesus never called Paul an apostle. 

Since all Scripture was given by Jesus (the Word), I would disagree that Jesus did not call Paul to be an apostle:

1 Cor 1:1  Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

Romans 1:1  Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

Ephesians 1:1  Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

 

[Knowingtruth]

2 hours ago, Yowm said:

Keep in mind, apostle means 'sent one' and the Holy Spirit is directly doing the sending...

Acts 13:2-4 KJVS
[2] As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. [3] And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. [4] So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus.

 

They were not sent as apostles.

[Knowingtruth]

1 hour ago, Davida said:

How did you come to this belief? What is your personal story of finding Jesus?

It is a long story. I have published a book, "Why I am A Believer In Jesus" available with amazon.com

[Knowingtruth]

1 hour ago, hmbld said:

Since all Scripture was given by Jesus (the Word), I would disagree that Jesus did not call Paul to be an apostle:

1 Cor 1:1  Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

Romans 1:1  Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

Ephesians 1:1  Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

 

Self-claims cannot be a proof for acceptance. Canon is man-made.