Saturday 31 December 2016

The New Testament was not inspired by the Holy Ghost !.



The bible clearly shows  its inconsistency It's full of blunders and errancy. Below I'll prove to you the so called gospels were not inspired by the Holy Spirit, it's a man made product for the ignorants. Let's expose the lies Christians make on how their bible is Inspired, a claim which only backfires on them!


---------------------

but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin." (Mark  3:29)

In short you say something bad, vulgar about the Holy Spirit then your In trouble right. Well what if the Holy Spirit  is lying himself what then?? Does the Holy Spirit contradict itself,  LETS FIND OUT?


And they all forsook him, and fled(Mark 14:50)


In other words the followers of jesus all forsook him deserted him like cowards. So how do we know who witnessed Jesus's trial If all the disciples fled Ahhhhnh yes the Holy Spirit inspired the writers right???


WRONG!!!!  

Let's read how the Holy Spirit contradicts itself making it a lier Which only means that its cannot be trusted and only deceived the writers:



Did Jesus Speak at His Hearing Before Pilate?


Meanwhile Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?" "Yes, it is as you say," Jesus replied. When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, "Don’t you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?" But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge— to the great amazement of the governor. 
(Matthew 27:11)


In Matthew gospelJesus doesn’t answer to the charges made against him  But according to John he does?



"You are a king, then!" said Pilate. Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."(John 18:37)



So no we have a major problem the verses above show us the Holy Spirit not only gave the writers false info he's also  deceiving thousands of Christians 


(No wonder Paul wasn't aware if he had the Holy Spirit )


In my judgment, she is happier if she stays as she is--and I think that I too have the Spirit of God. (1 Corinthians 7:40)

--------------

Christians fall into a serious dilemma since they claim to be inspired by the very same Holy Ghost. This also shows what kind of a mess the bible is very unreliable.





What were the names of the disciples?

Matthew 10:2 & Mark 3:16Luke 6:14
1 – Simon the Cananean1 – Simon called Peter
2 – Simon called Peter2 – Andrew his brother
3 – Andrew3 – James the son of Zabadee
4 – James son of Zabadee4 – John his brother
5 – John5 – Philip
6 – Philip6 – Bartholomew
7 – Bartholomew7 – Matthew the tax collector
8 – Matthew8 – Thomas
9 – Thomas9 – James the son of Alphaues
10 – James son of Alphaues10 – Simon the Zealot
11 – Labaous called Thadaues11 – Judas the son of James
12 – Judas the Escariot12 – Judas the Escario

It is stated in Matthew that Simon the Cananean was a disciple, whereas in Luke Simon the Zealot is mentioned. Also Matthew states Labaous called Thadaues to be a disciple, but Luke makes no mention of this name, rather Judas the son of James is stated instead.

Below the Talmud tells us there was only five disciples ?

Talmud Sanhedrin 43a  It is taught: Yeshu had five disciples - Matai, Nekai, Netzer, Buni, and Todah. 


Another biblical dilemma, also have you notice Luke and Mark are not mentioned as a disciple? 

Friday 30 December 2016

Did a Roman soldier shed Jesus’ blood?

Answer: John 19:34 claims that “one of the soldiers pierced his [Jesus’] side with a spear, and immediately there came out blood and water.” According to John 19:33, the Roman soldiers did not break Jesus’ legs because he was already dead. Chronologically, John 19:33 established the time of the inflicting of the wound in Jesus’ side (John 19:34) as subsequent to his death. John’s sequence of events is contradicted in some manuscript versions of Matthew 27:49 which state, “And another took a spear and pierced his side, and there came out water and blood.” This addition to the verse places the time of the inflicting of the wound as prior to Jesus’ death. However, it is an interpolation unsupported by the best of the ancient New Testament manuscripts. Blood oozing from a wound inflicted after death does not qualify as the shedding of blood required of an atonement offering. The piercing of Jesus’ body by a spear did not cause his death. Jesus did not die as a result of blood loss (Matthew 27:46-50, Mark 15:34-37, Luke 23:46, John 19:28-30). Jesus’ blood was not shed by a Roman soldier’s spear, thrust into his side.
Biblically, sacrificial death could only occur through the shedding of blood exclusively (Leviticus 17:11). Jesus, death by crucifixion can not be considered a sacrificial death. His death may have been caused by either asphyxiation or by going into “shock brought on by the traumatic physical events of his last hours, before and after he was nailed to the cross.”4 In his case, shock would not have been brought on solely by blood loss. The Gospels indicate Jesus’ blood was not shed to a degree that would make blood loss from the body the exclusive cause of death. Death solely by blood loss is the only biblical cause acceptable for an animal’s sacrificial death. 
The Law is considered by the New Testament to have been completely fulfilled by Jesus (Matthew 5:17-18). Complete fulfillment could only occur with the moment of Jesus’ death (John 19:30). That death is considered the culmination of the Law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:24-25; Ephesians 1:7; Hebrews 10:12, 14). Everything occurring to Jesus prior to that moment would have had to be under the Law. Yet, neither the physical condition (blemished), the age (over thirty years of age), the date (Nisan 15), the location (outside Jerusalem and its Temple), the executioners (Romans), the method (crucifixion), nor the cause of Jesus’ death (either asphyxiation or shock), is in accordance with that prescribed by the Scriptures for the sacrificing of a paschal lamb. Therefore, the Law was not fulfilled in Jesus. The evidence shows that he could not be equated with the paschal lamb.
This is sufficient to prove that Jesus did not shed his blood for the sins of mankind, thus Christians are in a dilemma 

How many Christians are there that can prove their love by giving up their life?



You all say Iraqis christians are being persecuted and many others from all over the world and you have the Noon arabic alphabet display on your whatsapp and facebook pic, Well prove your love and go save them giving up your life!! That's exactly what your jesus said :

-----------------------------------------------------------


We know what real love is because Jesus gave up his life for us. So we also ought to give up our lives for our brothers and sisters.
(1 john 3:16)



Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends.


THOUGHT SO COWARDS!!! 

Wednesday 28 December 2016

The Ascension of Jesus later added in the gospels so where did he go?



Christians brag Jesus is in heaven, not Muslim but Christians they go as far as saying where is your Prophet or all the other prophets Pbut, and where's Jesus... The same tape is always played by them.. Let's analyse what the gospels really say

--------------------------------


After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God.(Mark 16:19)


While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven.
(Luke 24:51)

--------------------------------




Biblical Scholars commentary 


(ASCENSION TO HEAVEN IS LATER ADDED)

The ascension of Jesus up to Heaven does not actually appear in the original forms of any of the gospels. It was not until 200 years after the supposed event took place that the ascension was added to later copies of Mark and Luke. Mark originally ends with the discovery of an empty tomb. Mathew and John remain to have no mention of the ascension into heaven.

Mark 16:9-20 where Jesus ascends bodily to heaven is not in the earlier scriptures but rather was added later. None of the earliest scriptures that we have such as the Alexandrian Unical Mss, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus have versus 9-20, they all just end at 16:8. Also early Christian writers noted that the ascension was not in the earliest manuscripts. Jerome and Eusebius both state that the best manuscripts available to them did not contain the extended ending. Also there are significant linguistic and stylistic differences between 9-20 and the rest of Mark. As noted on page 103 of "An Introduction to the New Testament" by new testament scholar Douglas J. Moo, the longer ending also contains several non-Markan words and expressions.


"and carried up into heaven" has been omitted by the RSV marg. (1946 Edition omits the words in the text), Ne, GN marg., NASV, NEB. Hills (3) p 123, (38) p 70, states that the words are omitted by Aleph, D, the Old Latin version (i.e. 5 copies-see Burgon, above) and the Sinaitic Syriac manuscript. Ruckman (2) p 96, (54) p 39, states that the words are contained by Papyrus 75, A, B. C, E, F, G, Theta and the vast majority of manuscripts, the Old Latin, the Vulgate, the Old Syriac (i.e. Peshitta) and Tatian's Diatessaron (180 AD).


In the 1952 RSV Mark 16 ends at verse 8 and the rest is relegated in small print to a footnote (more on this later). Similarly, in the commentary on the verses of Luke 24, we are told in the footnotes of the NRSV Bible "Other ancient authorities lack "and was carried up into heaven'" and "Other ancient authorities lack 'and worshipped him'". Thus, we see that the verse of Luke in its original form only said:

"While he blessed them, he parted from them. And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy."

It took centuries of "inspired correction" to give us Luke 24:51-52 in their current form.

----------------------------------------------------



From the above scholarly papers, it's agreed the ascension is not found in the earliest manuscripts, which tells us the authors were not aware of Jesus ascending to heaven or being taken up? SO WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?  

seems like Christians  are not aware of there own scriptures and they start jumping around on ours.. I hope Christians stop asking questions about where is your Prophet or any Prophets Pbut now, since they themselves have to answer where did their Jesus go according to the gospels missing episode..



(Footnote)

In the gospel, Luke recounts the ascension of Jesus on Easter Sunday night, thereby closely associating it with the resurrection.

BUT, in Acts 1:3, 9-11; 13:31 he historicizes the ascension by speaking of a forty-day period between the resurrection and the ascension. The Western text omits some phrases in Luke 24:51, 52 perhaps to avoid any chronological conflict with Acts 1 about the time of the ascension.

Yahweh lied to Moses about his name?




Interestingly we find a passage in the Torah where YAHWEH IS CAUGHT LYING TO MOSES, YES LYING !!!!!!  Don't believe me the evidence is below where yahweh tells moses that  Abraham, isaac and Jacob were unaware of the name Yahweh, however after reading the books first book of the pentateuch we find they were aware of the name yahweh and those before them!


----------------------




I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El-Shaddai--'God Almighty'--but I did not reveal my name, Yahweh, to them.
(Exodus 6:3)


-----------------------



From there he moved on to the hill country east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. He built an altar to Yahweh there, and he called on the name of Yahweh. (Genesis 12;8)



He also said to him, "I am the LORD, (Yahweh) who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it." (Genesis 15:7)


Abraham named the place Yahweh-Yireh (which means "the LORD will provide"). To this day, people still use that name as a proverb: "On the mountain of the LORD it will be provided." (Genesis 22:14


So he built an altar there, called on the name of Yahweh, and pitched his tent there. Isaac's slaves also dug a well there. ( Genesis 26:25)



Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, "With the help of the LORD (Yahweh) I have brought forth a man."
(Genesis 4:1)


Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the name of the LORD. (Yahweh). (Genesis 4:26)

---------------------

Now that's what you call the master of liars... The very god who lied to his messenger how could u trust such a god to be true to you? Note all the above passages say Yahweh in the hebrew text and not Elohim or Eli. Etc....now the golden question is why would yahweh lie and what gain does he get from it?

Tuesday 27 December 2016

Messiah not found in the Old Testament...


Why don't the Jews believe in Jesus as the Messiah? The fact the Old Testament (Tanach) does not mention of a messiah getting crucified hence, the Jewish authorities will not believe in such a Messiah, thus, they do not see him in the Scripture they study. Listen to how Paul explains the “blindness of the Jews”:
12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we behave with great boldness, 13 and not like Moses who used to put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from staring at the end of the glory that was fading away. 14 But their minds were closed. For to this very day, the same veil remains when they hear the old covenant read. It has not been removed because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 But until this very day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their minds; 16 but whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is present, there is freedom. 18 And we all, with unveiled faces reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another, which is from the Lord, who is the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:12-18).
--------------------

Did you notice how Paul testifies the Jews had not found the Messiah in their bible! This isn't something new since the gospels even tell us that the Jews were not aware that the Son of man I.e Jesus was going to leave?
The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Messiah will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?” (John 12:34)
Why would the Jews of that time speak the contrary to what Jesus was saying,Mir they had it all written in their bible?. Even Peter the Rock was not sure what was going on? He even rebuked Jesus for even suggesting that the messiah will be crucified.
Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" (Matthew 16:22)

Christians say Jesus was mentioned in the Old Testament? If that's the case why did they doubt? Surely they should of been waiting for such a fulfilment right! Why did Peter rebuke Jesus when Jesus apparently mentioned he has to suffer! Surely Peter should of accepted it right?? Unless he knew the messiah has to live and not get crucified!!!!  


---------------------

It seems like even Christians are blind when it comes to the New Testament, here's another dilemma according Luke Jesus said the law of Moses & other prophets all spoke everything about him? 


Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” (Luke 24:44)

This is probably the reason the Jews reject anything and everything the New Testament says. Where is this passage found in the Law of Moses? The answer is nowhere!. Says a lot about the authenticity of both books. But the main point to focus on is why did the Jews not find Jesus in their bible? Either it was taken out which means its corrupted or it's never been in their book which shows the New Testament lied and made up saying to fit their agenda?

Luke 24:44-46 






Monday 26 December 2016

Who buried Jesus and why didn’t they testify as to the disposition of the body?



Answer: The evangelists, writing between forty and seventy years after the crucifixion, name Joseph of Arimathaea (John adds Nicodemus) as the person who buries Jesus. The disciples must have considered him with deep suspicion. Their attitude toward Joseph and those who assisted him is reflected in an antagonistic passage directed against the population of Jerusalem and its rulers sometime after the crucifixion: “For those who live in Jerusalem, and their rulers, recognizing neither him nor the utterances of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning him. And though they found no ground for putting him to death, they asked Pilate that he be executed. And when they had carried out all that was written concerning him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb” (Acts 13:27-29).

This passage, attributed to Paul, includes among those guilty for the execution anyone (that is, Joseph and Nicodemus) who took part in the recovery of the body. Thus, Paul emphasizes that Jesus was buried not by his followers but by his enemies, the very group who Paul accuses of arranging for his death: “And when they had carried out all that was written concerning him, they took him down from the tree and laid him in a tomb.”

There was no contact between the burial party and the followers of Jesus. The Gospel of John written many years after the accusation attributed to Paul was first made explains this lack of communication by claiming that Joseph of Arimathaea was “a disciple of Jesus, but a secret one, for fear of the Jews” (John 19:38). Nevertheless, Paul’s statement shows that the disciples did not consider Joseph and Nicodemus as fellow followers of Jesus, but as enemies, no different than the rest of the “rulers,” comprising the Sanhedrin. It is only later that the burial party was turned from enemies into supporters.It may be that neither Joseph nor Nicodemus spoke up concerning the whereabouts of the body because they were non-existent legendary additions to the crucifixion story. They may never have existed beyond the assertion that some of the “rulers” removed and buried the body of Jesus.

With time the negative role associated with their involvement in the execution was reversed and personal names and positive motivation were added to the story. If the actual burial party had spoken up concerning the location of Jesus’ remains those who still remained faithful to Jesus’ memory apparently refused to believe them.According to John’s account, the tomb in the garden was used because it was so close to the execution site and time before the Sabbath was growing short (John 19:42).

Luke’s account also gives a sense of urgency (Luke 23:54).There is no suggestion that the burial party intended the tomb to be the permanent resting-place of Jesus’ corpse. However, there is the implication that the tomb was used out of temporary necessity on account of the need for quick burial and the proximity of this particular tomb to the crucifixion site. On the basis of the hurried nature of the burial as found in the Gospel accounts, there is a strong possibility that Joseph’s intent was to remove the corpse to a permanent resting place as soon as possible. This is so even if the tomb belonged to him. If Jesus’ corpse were to be transferred to a different tomb, it would be done as soon as possible (that is, Saturday night), due to the quick onset of decomposition. One thing is certain, it suited Gospel tradition never to hear from Joseph or Nicodemus again.

Questions about the bible simple questions

Rather then getting into hours of debate with these (lost people) Nasara just ask them these simple Questions :

-------------

Question (1)

How can you prove that the Gospels you preach is 100% authentic and the word of God. What Evidence do you have that the gospels are genuinely true and Jesus actually spoke all those words.

In short I need you guys to prove and convince me, that the gospels are 100% word of God true to the very Text, and that they are truly inspired. I know Paul said all scriptures are Inspired, but when Paul allegedly said that, the very gospels you preach were not written down. He was referring to the Old Testament so don't try pulling that stunt..

---------------

Question (2)

How can you Christians prove that your Jesus was a true prophet and messiah? How can you prove from the Old Testament that your Jesus was not false? Where did Yahweh declare that Jesus was a true messiah ?

Show us the word messiah in the Torah referring to Jesus, and also show us the name Jesus in the Torah referring to messiah?


In short can any Christians prove that their Jesus is a true Messiah? Watch how They will struggle to answer you back. In fact they use the Quran as their defence which only shows that they have no other way out other then accepting Islamic sources. Saying that till now I haven't come across a single nasrani who has been able to answer without using Islam or on the  other hand turning to insults!


Question (3)

The idea that God can only forgive our sins, by having his son tortured and killed as a scapegoat is surely from an object point of view a deeply unpleasant idea. If God wanted to forgive us our sins why didn’t he just forgive them? Why did he have to torture his so called son? God was in the position to accept any ransom he chose presumably why on earth would he have his son tortured for the sin of something who lived millions of year ago. Saying that if we were to use the biblical timeline then it would be around five thousand years ago?


So Adam was disobedient and that sin reverberated down to mankind throughout the ages is inherited by all humans. What kind of a doctrine is that? Inherited by all humans and had to be redeemed by the so called son of god being tortured, what kind of a morality are you propagating there?

Question (4)

In each of the canonical gospels, when the Temple guards and the Roman soldiers come to arrest Jesus, one of the disciples pulls out a sword and cuts off a slave’s ear. John 18:10 names the disciple as Simon Peter; the others leave him anonymous.


Now in any organized society, especially a Roman province with a history of having a low flash point for violence, interfering with an arrest, especially by using a weapon, would get you arrested as well. Yet nothing happens to Peter (or whomever); Jesus tells him to put up his sword, in one case heals the priest’s slave’s ear, and they all go off.

Question (5)

My Christian friends can your God still be a God without having a Son? could he still forgive if he had no Son?

Question (6)

Questions  

Why did Yahweh contradict himself in Genesis by creating the sun and moon on the fourth day [Gen. 1: 16-19] to provide light during the day and night when he already created light for the day and night on the first day [Gen. 1: 3-5]?

Bible say, “God is love” [1 John 4:8], “love is not jealous” [1 Corinthians 13: 4] and “God is jealous” [Exodus 20:5]? [Deductive reasoning makes it impossible for all three verses to be true simultaneously].

Why is it that God is allowed to possess a characteristic [jealousy, in Deut. 4:24 and Exodus 20:5] that the Bible itself denounces in Proverbs 27:4 and 14:30? 

When Noah’s ark landed, how did the kangaroos make it back to Australia? 


The Bible tells us that God regretted making Saul king (1 Samuel 15:11), but if that’s the case, doesn’t that mean God didn’t know the future? Because if he knew he was going to regret making Saul king, he would’ve never done it in the first place. 


The Bible tells us that God sacrificed his only son so that we can go to Heaven (John 3:16), but the Bible also tells us that he raised his son back from the dead again. If God didn’t really lose his son, then how is that a sacrifice? 

The Bible tells us that God isn’t willing that anybody should perish (2 Peter 3:9), but his holy word has been corrupted through the ages by mankind, so doesn’t that mean that God either allowed it to be corrupted, or he was unable to keep it from being corrupted?

In the book of James, God instructs Christians on what they should do when they get sick (James 5:14-15). There’s supposed to pray and lay hands on the sick person, and God promises to heal them, so why do you ignore God’s command and run to science every time


The Bible tells us that Jesus threw a huge temper tantrum in the Jewish temple (John 2:15). He actually made a whip, and whipped these people, and drove them out of the temple, but not before overturning their tables and spilling their money everywhere. The Bible also tells us that Jesus called a Canaanite woman a dog (Mark 7:27). And Jesus insulted the Pharisees by calling them derogatory names at every turn (Matthew 23:13-33). Jesus also lied to his own disciples (John 7:8-10); they asked him if he was going to the feast, he said, “no, my time’s not yet come.” And he turns around and goes to the feast.

Jesus also condones slavery and he did not denounce the crimes of rape or paedophilia (Matthew 10:24, Matthew 24:46, Luke 17:7). Not only that, Jesus taught that if you call somebody a ‘fool’, you are in danger of going to hell (Matthew 5:22). Then he turns around and calls several people fools (Matthew 23:17, Luke 24:26). Not only that, the Bible tells us that Jesus explicitly upheld the ghastly Mosaic Law that requires children to be killed if they became unruly (Matthew 15:3-4, Matthew 5:17-18, Deuteronomy 21:18-21).


there are clear historical inaccuracies in the New Testament. One such example is that of Acts 5, where Luke writes of the Pharisee Gamaliel's speech (vv. 34-39). This speech would have taken place around AD 35-40, yet it refers to Theudas' revolt of AD 46-47 as a past event. Furthermore, Gamaliel is made to say that "Judas the Galilean" raised a revolt which followed that of Theudas - but Judas' revolt was in AD 6 or 7! We know these dates from Josephus, most notably, as well as from other records.

The sons of Judas the Galilean, who had led a revolt in 6 C.E. over the Roman taxation census, were crucified by the Roman procurator Tiberius Alexander (46-48 C.E.), who was the nephew of the philosopher Philo.

(Josephus Antiquities 20: Chapter 5)

THEUDAS. The leader of an unsuccessful rebellion in the area of Judea during the 1st cent. A.D. The only reference to the name in Scripture appears in Acts 5:36, where Gamaliel, in his testimony before the Sanhedrin, indicates that the rebellion associated with Theudas occurred before the uprising led by Judas the Galilean, who arose in the days of the census" (presumably a reference to the taxation associated with the governor Quirinius, Ca. A.D. 6; cf. Lk. 2:lf.). A more probable date, however, was provided by Josephus (Ant. xx.5. 1197-99)), who assigned the movement to the rule of the procurator Cuspius Fadus (A.D. 44-46) several years after the death of Gamaliel himself. 

Josephus described Theudas as a self-proclaimed prophet who deluded the majority of the masses" (four hundred men according to Acts) with his promise to divide the Jordan River upon command so that the people could cross with ease, thus repeating the miracle performed by Joshua. The attack of a Roman cavalry regiment soon brought an end to the uprising, however, and many in the movement were either slain or captured. Theudas himself was decapitated. 

Some scholars (e.g., F. F. Bruce. _Comm. on the Book Of Acts_ [NICNT, 1954), pp. 124f.) have suggested that the accounts provided in Acts and Josephus refer to different individuals. But modern attempts to associate the Theudas of Acts with other historical rebels in Palestine, such as Simon (Herod the Great's former slave), Theudion (Herod the Great's brother-in-law), or Matthias (the son of Margaloth, a radical teacher of the law), have proven unconvincing. The name was relatively uncommon, and the significance attributed to the rebellion by the text of Acts certainly characterizes the movement as worthy of reference by Josephus. The disparity between the accounts of Acts and Josephus, with respect to both details and dating, would suggest instead some problem associated with the sources used by the authors. (C. N. Jefford)

In addition, what are we to do with the wide variation of chronologies in the Gospels, different placements of pericopes in the timeline of Jesus' ministry (i.e the healing of the paralytic in Mark 2), and the substantial disagreement of John with the other three, in terms of historical outline?

A third question concerns authorship - mainly, the authorship of the Gospels and of the Pentateuch. Both sets are anonymous, textually - furthermore, the earliest date we even have for a name being applied to the gospels is in the very late first century, with quotations by Papias (transcribed by Irenaeus), and that only to Mark and Matthew (if we are to understand him to refer to the texts we now know: I am content to do so). Moses' name wasn't applied to the Pentateuch until long after the exile...as in, more than a millennium after the latest events which it describes! True, Moses is the one whose name has been traditionally attached ever since - but why does one have to "believe" in Mosaic authorship as a cornerstone of faith being a christian?

Did Jesus condemn or approve homosexuality?


We know what the law of Moses says:

"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (Leviticus 20:13)


So Jesus being a man of peace and love would he kill or let them live?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Jesus tells us he's fulfilment on earth was written in the Law of Moses, the prophets and psalms. Can Christians show us where Jesus is mentioned in the OT starting with the  Law of Moses?



He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."
(Luke 24:44)

--------------------



Where is the proof that Satan was believed to be the devil before Christ, from the Old Testament.


Question :

what is the timeline between Numbers 34 to Deuteronomy 34?
how long would you say the duration is days, weeks, months, years?




-------------------

Did Jesus ever refer to the "Pentateuch" by their given names i.e. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy?

Was he even aware of such names? How comes he never uttered the names of those books, but rather referred to "it" as the Law of Moses.

Here's something fascinating, the names Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy are nowhere to be found in the Pentateuch or anywhere in the entire 66 books of the protestant Bible, isn't that something. 


so Christians have no problem in accepting God being CIRCUMSIED and having his private sucked during the practice being performed.

now thats BLASPHEMY!!


----------------

Question :

Why didn't Joseph try to contact his father during all his time in Egypt? After all, the distance between the land of Israel and Egypt is only "six days" of travelling, according to Nachmanides' calculations. Why, when he became the head of Potiphar's household -- and could easily do such a thing -- didn't Joseph send a letter to his father, informing him that he was alive and well? Certainly, once he became viceroy, the second most powerful man in Egypt, he could have done anything he wanted. All those many years of Jacob languishing, mourning for his favorite son, could have been avoided. Didn't Joseph miss his father just as much? How could he be apart from him all those years?

How could Joseph have allowed his father to mourn him for so long? Why didn't he let Jacob know that he was alive? Egypt is not so far from Canaan, and it was certainly within Joseph's means to dispatch a courier to his father with the good news that he was alive and well.


----------------------------------------------


Contradiction Ishmaelite or Israelite 
19 August 2017
20:54
Abigail was the mother of Amasa, whose father was Jether the Ishmaelite. (1 chronicles 2:17)



And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother. (2 samuel 17:25)



Yevamot 77a:1
Doeg raised before them all those objectionsfrom the others who are disqualified from entering into the congregation, and they were silent, not knowing how to respond. Doeg then wanted to proclaim that David was disqualified from entering into the congregation. He was immediately answered. Here it says: “Now Amasa was the son of a man, whose name was Jithra the Israelite, that went into Abigal the daughter of Nahash” (II Samuel 17:25), andyet elsewhere it is written that Amasa’s father was named “Jether the Ishmaelite”(I Chronicles 2:17).





More contradictions

When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite. (Genesis 26:34)

From the above verse we can cleary read basemath was the daughter of Elon the Hittite. However a few chapters later the same basemath become the daughter of Ishmael.


also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth. (Genesis 36:3)






Of David. A psalm. The earth is the LORD's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it; (Psalm 24:1)

Contradiction


The heavens belong to the LORD, but he has given the earth to all humanity. (Psalm 115:16)

Rabbi Levi raised a contradiction: It is written: “The earth and all it contains is the Lord’s,” and it is written else where: “The heavens are the Lord’s and the earth He has given over to mankind” (Psalms 115:16). There is clearly a contradiction with regard to whom the earth belongs. ( Talmud Berakhot  35a)





God made two great lights--the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. (Genesis 1:16)


Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi raises a contradiction between two verses. It is written: “And God made the two great lights” (Genesis 1:16),and it is also written in the same verse: “The greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night,” indicating that only one was great. (Talmud Chullin 60b:)


Assuredly, I will take back My new grain in its time And My new wine in its season, And I will snatch away My wool and My linen That serve to cover her nakedness. (Hosea 2:11)

                                                                Contradiction

I will grant the rain for your land in season, the early rain and the late. You shall gather in your new grain and wine and oil— (Deuteronomy 11:14)



the Gemara cites that Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa raised a contradiction: It is written, “I will take back My grain at its time and wine in its season” (Hosea 2:11), and it is written: “And you shall gather your grain, your wine and your oil” (Deuteronomy 11:14). To whom does the grain belong: To God, or to the people?  (Talmud Berakhot  35b)



Return, ye backsliding children, and I will heal your backslidings. Behold, we come unto thee; for thou art the LORD our God. (Jeremiah 3:22)


Contradiction



Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion: (Jeremiah 3:14)


Rabbi Yehuda raised a contradiction between two verses. It is written: “Return, you backsliding children I will heal your backsliding” (Jeremiah 3:22), implying that anyone can achieve healing, which is dependent only on repentance. But it also states: “Return, O backsliding children, says the Lord, for I am a lord to you, and I will take you one from a city, and two from a family” (Jeremiah 3:14), implying that repentance is available only to certain individuals.



Goat atones Yahweh's anger?

And there shall be one goat as a sin offering to the LORD, to be offered in addition to the regular burnt offering and its libation. (Numbers 28:15)

------------------

God saw that the moon was not comforted. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Bring atonement for me, since I diminished the moon. The Gemara notes: And this is what 
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: What is differentabout the goat offering of the New Moon, that it is stated with regard to it: “For the Lord” (Numbers 28:15)? The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: This goat shall be an atonement for Me for having diminished the size of the moon.  (Talmud Chullin  60)

Wait! the "Goat" was an atonement for Yahweh?



for Your faithfulness is as high as heaven; Your steadfastness reaches to the sky. (Psalm 57:11)

Contradiction

for Your faithfulness is higher than the heavens; Your steadfastness reaches to the sky. (Psalm 108:5)

Rava raised a contradiction: It is written: “For Your mercy is great unto the heavens, and Your truth reaches the skies” (Psalms 57:11); and it is written elsewhere: “For Your mercy is great above the heavens, and Your truth reaches the skies” (Psalms 108:5). How so? How can these verses be reconciled?  (Talmud Pesachim 50b)





The earth brought forth vegetation: seed-bearing plants of every kind, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that this was good.(Genesis 1:12)

Contradiction

when no shrub of the field was yet on earth and no grasses of the field had yet sprouted, because the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth and there was no man to till the soil, (Genesis 2:5)



Rav Asi raises a contradiction between two verses. It is written: “And the earth brought forth grass” (Genesis 1:12),on the third day of the week of Creation. And it is also written: “No shrub of the field was yet in the earth” (Genesis 2:5), on Shabbat eve, the sixth day of Creation, immediately before Adam was created. (Talmud Chullin  60b)



The LORD is righteous in all his ways and kind in all his works. (Psalm 145:17)



Rav Huna raised a contradiction between the two halves of a verse. It is written: “The Lord is righteous [tzaddik] in all His ways” (Psalms 145:17), indicating that God acts in accordance with the attribute of strict justice [tzedek], and then it is written in the same verse: “And kind [ḥasid] in all His works,” implying that He acts with grace and loving-kindness [ḥesed], going beyond the letter of the law.  (Talmud Rosh Hashanah 17b)




So Moses the servant of the LORD died there, in the land of Moab, at the command of the LORD. He buried him in the valley in the land of Moab, near Beth-peor; and no one knows his burial place to this day. (Deuteronomy 34:5-6 Masoretic Torah)

According to the Masoretic Torah, Moses of the Bible was buried by Yahweh in the land of Moab. The verse goes on to say no one knows where Moses was buried till this day. This tells us the text was written much later i.e. long after Moses.

Here's where it gets  interesting. We have a text which pre dates the Masoretic Torah by roughly a thousand years, that is the DSS.

So Moses the servant of the LORD died in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord . And they (Israelites) buried him in the valley in the land of Moab, opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows of his burial place to this day. (Deuteronomy 34:5-6 DSS Torah)

Did you catch the problem? The Masoretic Torah which postdates the DSS states Yahweh buried Moses. However the DSS which predates the Masoretic states "they" i.e. the Israelites buried Moses in the land of Moab. The other problem is, if the Israelites buried Moses in Moab, then surely they would know they location to where the exact place is. The text on both manuscripts states "no one knows till this day", again indicating the author wrote much later.  If for arguments sake the author wrote a thousand years after Moses, then yes he wouldn't know where the exact buried location would be unless they had a strong oral tradition which we know they didn't. It's possible the people who participated in burying Moses orally told people the location, which eventually faded away from the lips and memory of people. Whatever the case we see the earliest manuscript i.e. the DSS proves tampering took place at best.

Another issue to deal with. Did the Masoretic writers refer the Israelites as God?


If you ever forget the LORD your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed. (Deuteronomy 8:19 Masoretic Torah)

There is a variant reading of the above statement.

And If you  forget the LORD your God and walk after other gods and serve them and worship to them, I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses  against you today that you will surely perish. (Deuteronomy 8:19 DSS Torah)

Notice how the DSS Torah states Yahweh will use the heavens and earth as witnesses against those who worship a false god. This is very interesting since  Christians brag, Yahweh doesn't depend on anything as he only swears by himself. seems like the DSS opened a new can of worms.


It is a land the LORD your God cares for; the eyes of the LORD your God are always on it, from the beginning to the end of the year. (Deuteronomy 11:12)




so that your days and the days of your children may be many in the land the LORD swore to give your ancestors, as many as the days that the heavens are above the earth. (Deuteronomy 11:21 Masoretic Torah)

According to the DSS a foreigner is not allowed to eat Passover.

--------------------



And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. (Exodus 33:20)


Contradiction

But [Micaiah] said, “I call upon you to hear the word of the LORD! I saw the LORD seated upon His throne, with all the host of heaven standing in attendance to the right and to the left of Him. ( 1 Kings 22:19)

In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord, high and exalted, seated on a throne; and the train of his robe filled the temple. (Isaiah 6:1)

-----------------

How comes Micaiah and Isaiah were able to see Yahweh, yet when Moses demanded Yahweh refused to show himself? Doesn't that make Micaiah and Isaiah more unique then Moses for seeing Yahweh?

 ------------------


אין זה כי אם בית אלוקים, “this can only be (the location of) the House of G-d.” Rashi endeavours to find the source for the statement by the sages that G-d had said that it is intolerable that a righteous person of the calibre of Yaakov who needed a place to spend the night, should be unable to find more than a stone to lay his head on. Also why would Yaakov call the place that had been known as Luz “Yerusalem,” i.e. the house of G-d? Furthermore why afterwards does he refer to “Beyt El,” a place much further north? Clearly there appears to be some contradiction here! Our sages themselves seem to have had second thoughts when they said that Yaakov renamed called Luz as Beyt ElBeing aware of these difficulties, Rashi says; “therefore I say that Mount Moriah had been moved and Yaakov had arrived there, i.e. as far as Beyt El, (all on the same day)[If any reader finds all this as strange, I remind him that if G-d enabled Eliezer, Avraham’s servant, to cover a similar distance with his 10 camels when he went to look for a wife for his master in the course of one day, then Yaakov’s experience can certainly not be considered as so unbelievable. Ed.] There is also the problem that Yaakov instead of walking from B’eer Sheva to Charan would be travelling from west to East, as testified to by Isaiah 9,11 ארם מקדם ופלשתים מאחור, “Aram to the East and the land of the Philistines at the back.” (to the west) Moreover, we (our author) had previously explained that Aram and Charan are one and the same. (compare verse 10). According to what we have read here Yaakov was traveling from the south to the north according to what Rashi explained earlier. We have to say that Yaakov travelled the same route that his grandfather Avraham had traveled when coming from Charan, southward after having left both Ur Casdim and Charan on his way to the land of Canaan. He had proceeded southward in stages all the way to B’eer Sheva. Both he and Yitzchok had taken up residence in towns on this route from time to time as we have read in previous portions of the Torah. The route was well known and they were familiar with it. This is the reason why Yaakov also used this route. As to Rashi quoting Yaakov as having said that possibly he had failed to stop at a place where his father and grandfather had offered prayers to G-d, this must have referred not to Mount Moriah, for he had prayed there repeatedly as stated by our sages in B’reshit Rabbah at the end of chapter 78,16, where we are told that no one can properly appreciate how many libations Yaakov had offered at Mount Moriah, but to Beyt El, for Avraham had prayed there and built an altar as recorded in Genesis 12,78. Our sages in Sanhedrin 44 are on record that if Avraham had not prayed between Beyt El and Ai, the Jewish people would long ago have perished completely (Joshua 7,25 when they were defeated there during the first encounter They were saved only due to the merit acquired by the prayers Avraham had offered in that region.) The reason that this location is referred to as Beyt El is on account of the prayers offered there in the future, for in Yaakov’s time it was still known as Luz. Yitzchok had also offered prayers at that altar which his father Avraham had built. Even though we do not possess a written record of it, it is quite plausible to assume that he used this altar on numerous occasions in order to offer prayers. Yaakov, on the other hand, had not had an opportunity to offer prayers at that location up until now. This is also why he said: “is it possible that I simply passed by this place without stopping to offer up a prayer?” He therefore decided to retrace his steps after coming to Charan, and to go back as far as Beyt El to offer a prayer there. In response to Yaakov’s determination to do so, G-d folded the earth beneath him to expedite matters. What this meant in practice was that the town known as Luz was transported to the vicinity of Charan, saving him many days of walking. G-d’s motivation was that the prayer of a righteous person such as Yaakov should preferably be said in a Temple or other sacred site. As a result, the mountain of Moriah was immediately uprooted and removed as far as Charan. After having prayed there Yaakov continued on his way. When G-d saw that, He said: seeing that this righteous person has taken so much trouble to come to My residence, how can I allow him not to have shelter for the night? This is why He arranged for the sun to set prematurely so that Yaakov would spend the night there. During that night he dreamt the dream reported in detail in our chapter where it became clear to him that the place he had slept was destined to become a Temple in the future. Realising that this was the meaning of the dream, he called the site “house of G-d,” renaming the town of Luz to be known as Beyt El. (House of G-d). This is the meaning of the line: “he called that site Beyt El, the site being that which had previously been known as the town of Luz. The stone which had served as Yaakov’s “pillow,” which had come from Mount Moriah, remained at that site. Yaakov anointed it with oil as a symbol of its future significance. As soon as he had done this, he proceeded on his trek to Charan. It would be wrong to understand the verse as meaning that Yaakov arose in the morning in the town of Charan. This is clear from the Torah telling us in 19,1 that Yaakov then set out in the direction of the people residing in the land of the Orientals. When he met the shepherds huddled around the well he asked them where their home was and they told him that their home was Charan. When Yaakov, 20 years later, was on the way from Lavan to the land of Canaan, he passed this location and he named the site Beyt El and erected a monument at the site. (Genesis 35,7, and 15)[This is a unique exegesis, as, normally, Yaakov is understood as having had to return to that site after having already settled in the land of Canaan and having overlooked his promise to erect a Temple at that site so that G-d had to remind him. (compare chapter 33,18 30) Ed.] (COMMENTARY Chizkuni Genesis, Chapter 28:17)


-----------

Question for my Jewish and Christian friends
According to the Bible from creation till now, the earth is around 5,700 - 6000 years old. if this is true what evidence do you have to support it?

------------------

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God ahead of you. 32 For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him. (Matthew 21:31-32)
-------
Which tax collector and prostitute believed in John the Baptist? and if by believing in John the Baptist could attain a Prostitute salvation what good is the blood of your Jesus? no need for a human sacrifice. it was enough to believe in John the Baptist.
There is no mention of Jesus saying believe in John the Baptist and me. he already confirmed those who believed in John the Baptist are entering the kingdom of God.


------------

Q) Is Yahweh Holy?
A) Yes Psalm 99:9 (God is Holy)
Q) Is Yahweh a spirit?
A) Yes John 4:24 (God is a Spirit)
Q) If Yahweh is Holy and a Spirit, doesn't that make him the "Holy Spirit"? If Yahweh is the Holy Spirit who is the other Holy Spirit that's also called Holy Spirit? And how many Holy Spirits are there?
A) You need the Holy Spirit in you to know the answer! please stop asking me those questions as i'm under pressure. i won't be answering you. I'M BUSY!


-------



Did Only the Nile Turn to Blood or All the Water in Egypt? Flat out contradiction!
Yahweh said to Moses: Say to Aharon:Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt, over their tributaries, over their Nile-canals, over their ponds and over all their bodies of water, and let them become blood! There will be blood throughout all the land of Egypt—in the wooden-containers, in the stoneware. (Exodus 7:19)
But all Egypt had to dig around the Nile to drink water, for they could not drink from the waters of the Nile (Exodus 7:24)

Let me start at the end, with verse 24, which suggests that only the Nile water was affected by the plague. That flatly contradicts verse 19, which claims that the blood plague affected all the water in Egypt: “There will be blood throughout all the land of Egypt—in the wooden-containers, in the stoneware,” where the last phrase suggests that even water stored in various containers turned into blood!

--------------------

The words of Qarāfī, who says: ‘If (the Christians) say, “how do you (Muslims) hold onto these scriptures [i.e. the Bible] when you consider them to be unauthentic?” we reply that the prophethood of our Prophet, peace be upon him, is proven by miracles and has no need for these books. Yet, we point to what they hold as proof of his prophethood, peace be upon him, only in order to force the ahl al-kitāb, who believe in their authenticity, to accept the argument (ilzām)’ (Qarāfī, Ajwiba, p. 463).

---------




1. God loves the world versus do not love the world.



For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. (1 John 2:15)

2. People believed when they saw Jesus’s signs versus they did not believe.

Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. (John 2:23)
Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him. (John 12:37)

The author of John’s Gospel has recorded contradictions at the superficial level of language to encourage the audience to think more deeply.

3. They know Jesus and where he comes from versus they do not.

So Jesus proclaimed, as he taught in the temple, “You know me, and you know where I come from.” (John 7:28)

Jesus answered, “Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.” (John 8:14)

They said to him therefore, “Where is your Father?” Jesus answered, “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” (John 8:19)

4. If Jesus bears witness of himself, his testimony is not true, versus the opposite.

If I bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true. (John 5:31, my trans.)
So the Pharisees said to him, “You are bearing witness about yourself; your testimony is not true.” Jesus answered, “Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.” (John 8:13–14)

5. Jesus judges no one versus he has much to judge.

You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. (John 8:15)

Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me. (John 8:16)

I have much to say about you and much to judge, but he who sent me is true, and I declare to the world what I have heard from him. (John 8:26)

6. Jesus did not come into the world to judge it versus he came to judge.

If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. (John 12:47)

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. (John 3:17)

Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.” (John 9:39)


Thinking Deeply on Meaning

I hope that after reading the list above and studying the subtle way the Gospel of John is written, you will agree that these formal contradictions are deliberate. They are part of the author’s way of making us reflect more deeply on the multiple meanings of the words involved.1This sample prepares us to consider a quotation by skeptic Bart Ehrman from a book in which he explains what he thinks are the clearest contradictions within the Gospels:
One of my favorite apparent discrepancies—I read John for years without realizing how strange this one is—comes in Jesus’ “Farewell Discourse,” the last address that Jesus delivers to his disciples, at his last meal with them, which takes up all of chapters 13 to 17 in the Gospel according to John. In John 13:36, Peter says to Jesus, “Lord, where are you going?” A few verses later Thomas says, “Lord, we do not know where you are going” (John 14:5). And then, a few minutes later, at the same meal, Jesus upbraids his disciples, saying, “Now I am going to the one who sent me, yet none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’” (John 16:5). Either Jesus had a very short attention span or there is something strange going on with the sources for these chapters, creating an odd kind of disconnect.2
This forms part of Ehrman’s cumulative case for there being irreconcilable contradictions within the Gospels. However, it also shows a weakness in his method. In every case listed above, Jesus is portrayed as speaking one or both sides of the contradiction. But why may an outstanding teacher not use paradox? Each of the formal contradictions we have seen highlights the multiple meanings of words. In the Gospel of John, Jesus is going to the cross and then to his Father, God. The disciples are not asking about that but are only thinking in mundane terms of where he will next walk to. Ehrman has just missed the irony.





Written for the skeptic, the scholar, and everyone in between, this introduction to the historical and theological reliability of the four Gospels helps readers better understand the arguments in favor of trusting them.
The problem seems, therefore, to be that the question of contradictions has become part of a point-scoring exercise between those who claim or deny error in the Gospels. Here the author of John’s Gospel has recorded contradictions at the superficial level of language to encourage the audience to think more deeply. It is somewhat similar to how Dickens opened his A Tale of Two Cities with a whole list of contradictions to characterize the inconsistencies of an era. He famously began, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.”3

The presence of such deliberate formal contradictions does not mean that the contradictory statements are not both true in some way at a deeper level. But these formal contradictions do show that the author is more interested in encouraging people to read deeply than in satisfying those who want to find fault.

If one author may use vocabulary in more than one way, why may not two authors? If anyone wants to argue that two Gospel accounts are in such conflict that both cannot be true, he must first ensure that he has correctly understood the claims being made in each text and that he is not reading either of the accounts in a way that is not intended. For all the many contradictions that have been alleged in the Gospels, and for all the texts that remain puzzling, I do not know of any that cannot possibly be resolved.
Notes:

  1. Oxford philosopher Thomas W. Simpson argues that the formal contradiction of John 5:31 and 8:14 in fact shows “philosophical sophistication.” See his “Testimony in John’s Gospel: The Puzzle of 5:31 and 8:14,” Tyndale Bulletin 65, no. 1 (2014): 101–18, esp. 101.
  2. Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don’t Know about Them) (New York: HarperOne, 2009), 9.
  3. Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities (London: Chapman & Hall, 1859).

------------------

Pauls thought on homosexuals
That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved. Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done. Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, quarreling, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They invent new ways of sinning, and they disobey their parents. They refuse to understand, break their promises, are heartless, and have no mercy. They know God's justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too. (Romans 1:26-32)
---------------
Notice how Paul condemns the homosexuals in verse 27
"And the men, instead of having normal sexual relations with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men, and as a result of this sin, they suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved."
Soon after Paul says verse 32, the law of God states they should die, i.e. executed according to the law of the Torah
"They know God's justice requires that those who do these things deserve to die, yet they do them anyway. Worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too.(verse 32) cross reference with the Torah
"If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:13)
We can conclusive evidence from Paul where he quotes the Torah saying homosexuals should be killed. Now the question is how many Christians agree with Paul?

---------

What was the first deception?

 So, give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead. This last deception will be worse than the first." (Matthew 27:64)

 The question from the above passage is, what was his "FIRST DECEPTION" that the Jews were so concerned about? why didn't the disciples nor the author make any comments of this FIRST DECEPTION. What exactly did he do to be labelled a deceiver? Such an allegation was not refuted.

 What is mean by the "first deception" is not made clear. Theologian Daniel J. Harrington suggests it was probably Jesus' claim to be the King of the Jews

 Harrington, Daniel J., The Gospel of Matthew, Liturgical Press, 1991 pg. 405




Re-Examining Banu Qurayzah Incident

  Kaleef K. Karim & Aliyu Musa Misau Content: 1. Introduction 2. Jewish tribes Made a Pact with Muslims 3. Events that Occurred ...