Sunday, 20 November 2016

Christians got it wrong

"You are not yet fifty years old," they said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!
(John 8:57)


Notice from the above text, once read from context we find that the jews and jesus were having a face to face dialogue. Jesus spoke about Abraham that he was waiting to see his days..

“Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.” (v56)

Yet the jews answered back :

"You are not yet fifty years old," they said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!
(John 8:57)

Now why did the jews say YOU ARE NOT FIFTY YEARS OLD? AND YOU HAVE SEEN ABRAHAM?? What difference would it make if jesus was 500 years old since the time gap between Abraham and Jesus would have been 4000 years...

Unless they were speaking of a man who lived during the time of Jesus called Abraham which would make more sense saying your not fifty and you know Abraham.

Its like saying your not 60 years old how can you say you saw JFK ( ex president) now the question is if jesus was meant to declare his divinity then why didnt he say before Adam was Iam?? Thats if we take the Iam as God even though thats not what it means! Why stop at Abraham how about Noah do you see the problem this causes for christians

This tells us according to john there must of been a man during the first century called Abraham whom the jews were taking as a pious man

Here's another problem 

John 8:57

TEXT: "and have you seen Abraham?"
EVIDENCE: p66 Sc A B C D K L W X Delta Theta Pi Psi ff13 28 33 565 700 892 1010 1241 Byz Lect lat vg syr(p,h,pal) most cop(north)

NOTES: "and has Abraham seen you?"
EVIDENCE: p75 S* 0124 syr(s) one cop(north) cop(south)


COMMENTS: A few copyists apparently changed the Jews' question to be more like Jesus' statement in verse 56 ("he would see my day; and he saw [it]").
this changes the entire notion of the IAM saying wouldn't you say!
Textual Variant 

Yahweh feared himself?

A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his roots a Branch will bear fruit.
The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him-- the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of might, the Spirit of the knowledge and fear of the LORD. And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears.
(Isaiah 11:1-3)


Our Christian friends boast this is a prophecy of Jesus the Messiah mentioned in Isaiah, and for the sake of argument they are correct in one way, this actually is a PROPHECY OF THE MESSIAH which Jewish rabbis don't hesitate to admit. But the question is does it fit Jesus and the question is no why u may ask read the above passage carefully its states in verse 2 and 3 THE MESSIAH WILL FEAR GOD!

IF JESUS IS GOD HOW DOES HE FEAR HIMSELF? The the dilemma our Christian friends are in is wether Jesus was the messiah which means he has to FEAR GOD, or was he God which means GOD FEARED HIMSELF? Where does the New Testament say Jesus feared God? If he dint then did he fear himself? If he did then he can't be a God but a Messiah 

Take your pick 

nonsense !!


And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair,"Come, gather together for the great supper of God
(Revelations 19:17)


How in the world did john see an angel STANDING IN THE SUN?? What kind of sun glasses did he wear lol pure nonsense

Why does the Qur'an Call Jesus (pbuh) "Al-Maseeh"


I wish to seek your help regarding the usage of "Al-Maseeh" in reference to the Qur'an.

This is an excerpt of my argument with a Christian regarding the usage of "Al-Maseeh". He was asking these questions:

What did Jesus do, according to the Qur'an, that made him the Messiah? He preached, that's all?  What differentiates the Messiah from any other prophet? Again, the Qur'an's assertion that Jesus is the Messiah is much more nonsensical than any Christian claim.

My argument and response to this was:

Every prophet of God is an anointed one of God, a Messiah, but the title Al-Maseeh or Messiah, or its translation "Christ" is exclusively reserved for Jesus, the son of Mary, in both Islam and in Christianity.  This is not unusual in religion. There are certain other honorific titles which may be applied to more than one prophet, yet being made exclusive to one by usage: like "Rasulullah", meaning "Messenger of God", which title is applied to both Moses (19:51) and Jesus (61:6) in the Holy Quran. Yet "Rasullullah" has become synonymous only with Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, among Muslims (if you have studied Islam, that is). Every prophet is indeed a "Friend of God", but its Arabic equivalent "Khaleellullah" is exclusively associated with Prophet Abraham (pbuh). This does not mean that the others are not God's friends. "Kaleemullah", meaning "One who spoke with Allah" is never used for anyone other than Moses, yet we believe that God spoke with many of His messengers, including Jesus and Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of God be upon all His prophets. Associating certain titles with certain personages only, does not make them exclusive or unique in any way. We honour all in varying terms.

He e-mailed me back his answer to mine:

My main objection is that which is said above. I am unaware of the Qur'an referring to any prophet as a Messiah.  Perhaps you can show me an example. Note specifically that Jesus is called AL-masiiH.  Al is closely equivalent to "the" in English [though the Arabic definite article definitely serves more grammatical functions than the English article];  it is a definite article. Definite articles point to uniqueness and singularity. Notice, one does not say, Jesus was the prophet in Islam. One says, Jesus was a prophet. Messiah is, therefore, as unique of a title as the Seal of the Prophets.  Certain titles do make some of the prophets unique and distinguishable.  Mere historical events and chronology effectively do this.  Muhammad, for example, is unique for many reasons Simple reason merely being that  is the last of all prophets.

I hope you can give me your answer on my question and comments on what this Christian is saying.



There are two separate questions that may be asked regarding the usage of the word 'Al-Maseeh' in the Qur'an for Jesus (pbuh). Firstly, it may be asked why has the Qur'an used the word 'Al-Maseeh' for Jesus (pbuh); and secondly, why was Jesus (pbuh) called 'Al-Maseeh'. Both these questions need to be dealt with separately, as it is quite possible that the answers to these questions may, technically be quite different from each other.

As far as the question that why has the Qur'an used the word 'Al-Maseeh' for Jesus (pbuh) is concerned, the answer is quite simple. In the environment of the revelation of the Qur'an - i.e. the pre-Islamic Arabia, Jesus (pbuh) was referred to as 'Al-Maseeh'. The word was an established and a well-known appellation (i.e. laqab in Arabic and Urdu languages) for Jesus (pbuh). The Qur'an, as is its style, under normal circumstances, used the same words for the deliverance of its message, which were generally in vogue in the environment that it addressed. Thus, it is obvious that if Jesus (pbuh) was referred to by the Arabs by some other appellation or name, the Qur'an would then have used that other appellation or name to refer to him, unless there was something wrong in using such appellation for Jesus (pbuh). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) was referred to by the appellation of 'Al-Maseeh' in the pre-Islamic Arabia is so well established that there is no need for citing any references for this purpose. However, to avoid unnecessary details and complications, the following poetic verse of a Christian Arab poet - Samuel - should suffice as evidence of the above point:

And in the final days, came our 'Maseeh' and guided the people of the world to complete peace.

Now let us turn to the second question, i.e. why was Jesus (pbuh) given the appellation of 'Al-Maseeh'. The word 'Maseeh' is generally considered to be a Ta`reeb (i.e. Arabization or adoption in the Arabic language, with some modification in the word) of the Hebrew word "maw-shee-akh", which means anointed. In the Arabic language as well, the word has the same meaning, although, some linguistic sources have also expressed the opinion that the word actually implies 'anointer' rather than 'anointed'. This is primarily due to the fact that in the Arabic language, words similar in sound and construction to 'Maseeh' (like 'Fa`eel', 'Raheem' and 'Rajeem' etc.) in its basic word structure can be used to denote the subject clause as well as the object clause. Thus, the word 'Maseeh' could imply 'Mamsooh' (i.e. the one who is anointed) or 'Maaseh' (i.e. the anointer).

Linguistic scholars of the Arabic language have proposed a number of reasons for the usage of 'Al-Maseeh', as an appellation for Jesus (pbuh) [1]. Some hold that the word means 'truthful', and was used as an appellation for Jesus (pbuh) to imply to his truthfulness. Some hold it was used as an appellation for Jesus (pbuh) because he lived his life without taking for himself a permanent abode (as the Arabic phrase 'Masaha al-Ardh' implies a person who travels a lot). Some think that the reason for this appellation was that Jesus (pbuh) used to correct others of their diseases merely by the touch of his hands, and thus was called 'Al-Maseeh', implying the one who anoints for removing disease. Some hold that the reason for this appellation was that Jesus (pbuh) was anointed with blessings. While, some hold that the appellation was given to Jesus (pbuh) because he came into this world out of his mother's womb, naturally and divinely anointed with oil.

One may hold any of the opinions given above (or even one besides these), which in his opinion gives an acceptable reason for the particular appellation for Jesus (pbuh). In my opinion, the opinion recorded last, i.e. because of coming in this world from his mother's womb, naturally and divinely anointed with oil seems to be the reason for this appellation. All the other explanations, except for the last two could only be accepted as probable explanations for the appellation, had the word 'maw-shee-akh' also entailed these meanings in the Hebrew language. However, it is believed that the Hebrew word 'maw-shee-akh' meant 'anointed'. Thus, it seems more probable that the reason for giving Jesus (pbuh) this name had something to do with his anointment.

It is clear from a number of verses of the Old Testament that anointment was a Hebrew tradition, which generally implied one of the following three things:

1.      Appointment of the anointed as a priest [2];

2.      Appointment of the anointed as a ruler, or a king (it seems that this is a Hebrew tradition since the time when kings or rulers were appointed by divine authority) [3]; and 

3.      Making something clean and holy (this was, generally, anointing with reference to things rather than people) [4]

Thus, anointment of a person generally meant his appointment as a prophet (priest) or a king. Keeping this Hebrew tradition in perspective, it seems that the appellation of 'Al-Maseeh', i.e. the anointed also implied 'the appointed'. As I have stated earlier, I am inclined toward taking the reason for this appellation to be that contrary to the prophets and kings preceding him, Jesus (pbuh) was naturally and divinely anointed, implying his divine appointment as God's prophet.

Whatever one holds to be the correct reason for the referred appellation of Jesus (pbuh), the fact remains that it was, nevertheless, an established and a well-known appellation for him. The Qur'an has referred to Jesus (pbuh) by this name because this was the name, which was commonly used for Jesus (pbuh) in the pre-Islamic Arabia.

I hope this helps.

 1) For details, refer to the word 'Al-Maseeh' in the Arabic dictionary 'Lisaan al-Arab'. 

 2) See for instance Exodus 28: 41, Exodus 29: 1 - 9, Exodus 40: 13 - 15 etc.

 3) See for instance, 1Samuel 9: 16, 1Samuel 15: 1, 1Samuel 16: 8 - 13, 1Kings 1: 32 - 34, 1Kings 19: 15 - 16, Psalms 23: 5 - 6 etc.

 4) See for instance: Exodus 29: 35 - 37, Exodus 30: 22 - 29, Exodus 40: 9 - 11 etc.,

 By Moiz Amjad

Did he really sacrifice himself ?

Christians your Jesus was killed by the Jews? Meaning he didn't sacrifice himself rather he was killed?? So where is the sacrifice?

For some of the Jews killed the prophets, and some even killed the Lord Jesus. Now they have persecuted us, too. They fail to please God and work against all humanity 
(1 Thessalonians 2:15)

When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. (John 19:30)

Seems like he was poisoned wouldn't u say that's before he was forsaken 

And at three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" (which means "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?").
(Mark 15:34)

Then he went HELL
(1 Peter 3:19)

Bear in mind Paul tells us he was killed, again where's the sacrifice if one is killed?

For some of the Jews killed the prophets, and some even killed the Lord Jesus. Now they have persecuted us, too. They fail to please God and work against all humanity (1 Thessalonians 2:15)

If Jesus was sinless then Yahweh is a sinner!

Think of it Christians brag that Jesus never sinned he was a sinless lamb, he never killed anyone never hurt anyone never cursed anyone etc etc.. If this is the case then Yahweh must be a super Sinner since he was the cause of many violence as found in the Old Testament killing people children's women's animals cursing people torturing people etc etc.. 

Now Christians may say well Jesus was God so God can't be a sinner, then how do you explain the God of the Old Testament was he a different God? You can't have the cake and eat it. Either Jesus was the God of the new and Old Testament which would make him a a violent evil God or he was a human and has nothing to do with the Old Testament ?? Take your pick

Below is a screenshot from facebook. read how christians out of frsutration called me an Atheist!

(69:40) that this is the speech of an honourable Messenger,


Here, “a noble Messenger” implies the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and in( Surah At- Takweer, Ayat 19). the angel Gabriel, the argument being that after describing the Quran as the word of an honorable Messenger, it has been said: It is not the word of a poet nor of a soothsayer, and obviously the disbelievers of Makkah branded the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and not Gabriel as a poet and soothsayer. On the contrary, in Surah At-Takweer, after describing the Quran as the word of “a noble messenger” it has been said: That Messenger has great power, and has high ranks with the Owner of the Throne: there he is obeyed and held as trustworthy. And Muhammad (peace be upon him) has seen him on the bright horizon. (verses 20-23). Almost the same thing has been stated in (Surah An-Najm, Ayats 5-10) about Gabriel. 

Here, the question arises; In what sense has the Quran been described as the word of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and of Gabriel. The answer is: the people were hearing it being recited by the tongue of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the Prophet (peace be upon him) by the tongue of Gabriel. Thereupon, in one way it was the word of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and in another way of Gabriel, but a little below it has been explicitly stated: It is indeed a Revelation from the Lord of the worlds, which is being presented before Muhammad (peace be upon him) by the tongue of Gabriel and before the people by the tongue of Muhammad (peace be upon him). The word Messenger itself points to the truth that the word belongs to neither of them but they have presented it as Messengers of the One Who has sent it down.

Serpant or Satan?

And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the...