Posted on 05/25/2011 2:34:26 PM PDT by wmfights
Mohammed also rotted in the ground.
The life, death, and resurrection of Jesus has been investigated and shown to have more verifiable veracity than most ancient historic events.
If you’re truly interested, Lee Strobel’s “Case for Christ” details the reasons for this measurement of verifiability of His life.
If you’re a “mocker”, pound sand.
A prophet is one who purportedly speaks the Word of God Himself.
Jesus did so, inherently, because He is God incarnate.
However, he did not leave the option of being a “good man”, or a “good teacher”, as He claimed to BE God.
Only an evil liar or lunatic would do so if it weren’t true. So, “good man and teacher” is not an option.
Liar, Lunatic, or Lord - you must give an answer.
Matt 16:15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”
Mystery of the cross both man and God. But if I listen to you a liar because Christ calls himself a prophet.
Rev 5:3 And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
Rev 5:4 And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
Rev 5:5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
I can assume that Christ has not stopped being man.
The stories surrounding Mary, John the Baptist, and miracles performed by Jesus. Muslims hold Mary in high regard and consider Jesus to be a great Prophet. These are areas of Scripture muslims are familiar with.
The idea is to slowly work towards the power of The Gospel.
I can’t provide any argument to you as long as you doggedly cling to the assumption that “prophet” excludes all other roles of Christ, ie, if he’s a prophet, he’s NOTHING ELSE.
Good day.
Obviously you don't know me.
The point of these threads is to get Christians to realize that saying something is true "because the Bible tells me so" doesn't reach the lost that believe the Bible is corrupted.
Apologies, but I’ve run into too many that I’ve wasted time with that ask “seeker” questions but whose only intention is to “disprove” the Bible or to affirm their own disbelief.
So, now I include the “pound sand” portion for those who are mockers and not truly seeking the truth of God.
That wouldn't preclude Muhammed from being a Prophet.
What about David? He was a Prophet and had a husband killed so his affair with his wife wouldn't be made public. He commanded armies that killed thousands.
No problem. I can appreciate the frustration. FWIW, I'm just pushing for a more challenging discussion of why Christianity is true and why we can be so confident in our faith.
In the realm of humans, many a wise boss does indeed give his son experience being a janitor. It helps the son understand the importance of each job in the business, even the lowliest.
In the spiritual realm, the janitor analogy also works because Jesus became a lowly man, born in a stable, buried in a borrowed tomb.
Good point. Plus the fact that Luke is writing for Gentiles. Amen, and thanks again.
Yes, in “Rum” means Roman in both Arabic and Turkish. The Turkish name for the Partriarchate of Constantinople is “Rum Patrikhi” = “Roman Patriarchate”. Under the Ottomans, Orthodox Christians were called the “Rum Millet” = “Roman Nation”, and the Patriarch of Constantinople was forced to have role of Ethnarch. And among Arabic speakers, it’s not just the terribly scrupulous among us Orthodox who call (Western Rite) folks in communion with the Pope of Rome “Latins”, the Arabic word for “Roman Catholic” is “Latin” (pronounced Lateen).
Until shortly before the Greek War of Independence, “Greek” nationalism was not styled “Hellenism” (Hellene meant “Greek pagan”), but “Romanism”. (Circa 1776 if you called a Greek speaking Christian a “Hellene”, you’d likely get a punch in the nose along with the declaration “I’m not a Hellene, I’m a Roman!”.)
If that makes sense.:o)
It also potentially puts a different "Rum" into ...
(See tagline)...
> That wouldn’t preclude Muhammed from being a Prophet.
We were comparing Jesus and Mohammed, NOT David and Mohammed.
Jesus is the testator of the New Covenant, and Mohammed is the testator of the Koran.
Unlike the genocidal savage Mohammed, Jesus NEVER killed anybody for any reason, NEVER stole, NEVER raped, NEVER lied, NEVER committed fornication, NEVER sinned.
However, consider that David confessed his sin and begged God’s forgiveness (Psalm 52).
Where did Mohammed ever do that? Rather, Mohammed revelled in mahem, murder, piracy, kidnapping and torture. Mohammed delighted in the suffering of others and always justified his mayhem with rantings from the Koran.
David’s wars were wars of self-defense, not wars of plunder and conquest to enrich himself and spread a savage death cult.
Even though David begged God’s forgiveness, God called David a “bloody man” (2nd Samuel 16:8), and David had to suffer the earthly consequences of his sin, even though he was forgiven in the spirirtual realm and was called elsewhere, “a man after God’s own heart”.
There were times that David, like all of us, lived as though there were no God watching. David KNEW he was a sinner, confessed his sins, and submitted himself to God.
> However, consider that David confessed his sin and begged
> God’s forgiveness (Psalm 52).
Psalm 51, not 52. Fat-finger.
WOW! Excellent article. I’m saving a copy for future reference.
While I agree with some of what you say concerning “modern day” prophets, I totally disagree with your take on the Biblical book Revelation. God was who made sure it was included in what we have today. It was also accepted by the early church as a book written by the Apostle John.
I’d like to hear why you believe it should not have been in the Bible.
You mean aside from reading like a blow-by-blow description of a bad LSD trip I assume....
The thing starts out:
THE REVELATION TO JOHN CHAPTER 1 1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must SHORTLY come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
That's the biggest problem. There is no rational definition of "shortly" which means that two thousand years could go by without whatever was supposed to happen having happened, and anybody with brains or talent should still be sitting around waiting for it.
Well sounding like an LSD trip can't just be applied to Revelation. Ever read the dreams Daniel had? How about Ezekiel?:
2 On the fifth of the month—it was the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin— 3 the word of the LORD came to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi, by the Kebar River in the land of the Babylonians.[a] There the hand of the LORD was on him.
4 I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north—an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal, 5 and in the fire was what looked like four living creatures. In appearance their form was human, 6 but each of them had four faces and four wings. 7 Their legs were straight; their feet were like those of a calf and gleamed like burnished bronze. 8 Under their wings on their four sides they had human hands. All four of them had faces and wings, 9 and the wings of one touched the wings of another. Each one went straight ahead; they did not turn as they moved.
I would ask, why do you have a problem with figurative language? Not everything is literal in Scripture for specific reasons. Besides, what John wrote didn't say that EVERYTHING he was told was to happen "shortly". He said in chapter 1, verse 19:
“Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.
He then addressed seven churches, who actually existed, with messages from the Lord concerning their faults and attributes as well as God's judgments upon them. These judgments are still viable warnings to any and all churches of Christ. Then he describes Heaven as best as a mortal man possibly can. It's pretty clear that he then foretells the future judgment of Almighty God upon a wicked world - foretells, because THAT obvious destruction has certainly not even come close to happening yet. He frequently explains what certain symbolic language means. It ends with the description of the new heaven and new earth where righteousness reigns for eternity.
I definitely believe that the Apostle John wrote this under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and it was included in the canon of Holy Scripture precisely because that is what directed them to do. The Bible we have today is no accident. It is a gift from God so that we have an infallible, objective authority for all the doctrines of the faith.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.