Does the Qu'ran tell the same truth found in the Christian Bible?

[popsthebuilder]

Arius was declared a heretic, and the Ecumenical aspect of it is that the universal church was at the council.

By universal you mean Catholic?

Arius was actually reinstated

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Pedrito]

My apologies to popsthebuilder for not getting back to this sooner and with more detailed input.

I still have too many balls in the air to do this properly.

So I’ll just throw a thought in that I suspect has been expressed much better by others already.

(popsthebuilder may be aware that I read through the Qu’ran one weekend when on assignment in Fiji, and was confined to the hotel by cyclonic weather. The Koran was in a drawer in my room next to the Gideon Bible. I found the compilation to be a confusing mixture of calls to mercy and calls to violence. I later heard, but never checked up on it, that if the books are read in order of writing, there is a progression from one to the other.)

The major difference can be summed up by saying that the Qu’ran denies the atoning death of Jesus, while the Bible portrays Jesus’ atoning death as the only basis on which God forgives mankind’s death-inducing sin and thereby rescues mankind from death. All else seems rather secondary by comparison.

Now for some general points triggered by a post in this thread.

==============================================================================================

atpollard in Post #24: The God-man became sin. That is based on a mistranslation of 2 Corinthians 5:21: For He has made Him who knew no sin, [to be] sin for us, that we might become [the] righteousness of God in Him.

Paul is here expressing a Hebrew thought within the limitations of the Greek language, In Hebrew, the word that means "sin" (Strong's H2403) also means "sin offering". The word is so translated in Exodus 29:14, for instance. The equivalent words in Greek (Strong's G265 and G266) carry meanings associated only with "sin".

So we see a Hebrew thought being expressed the only way possible in Greek. The Hebrew Christians would have understood that immediately, and explained it to their Pagan Christian associates.

The translators of some Bible versions have been perceptive enough to understand that.

==============================================================================================

atpollard in Post #24 further said: The God-man raised HIMSELF from the dead. That statement is based on John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. and John 10:18: No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father..

However, every other Scripture statement I have found states that God raised Jesus from the dead. E.g. Acts 5:30: The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.. So therefore, because Scripture is not self-contradictory, each of those two verses commonly invoked, has a different, profound meaning of its own.

==============================================================================================

atpollard also said: Christ will raise us to be with him ... glorified and perfect. That is perfectly in line with Scripture teaching. True Christians will be united with Jesus by means of resurrection at his return.

 

[popsthebuilder]

My apologies to popsthebuilder for not getting back to this sooner and with more detailed input.

I still have too many balls in the air to do this properly.

So I’ll just throw a thought in that I suspect has been expressed much better by others already.

(popsthebuilder may be aware that I read through the Qu’ran one weekend when on assignment in Fiji, and was confined to the hotel by cyclonic weather. The Koran was in a drawer in my room next to the Gideon Bible. I found the compilation to be a confusing mixture of calls to mercy and calls to violence. I later heard, but never checked up on it, that if the books are read in order of writing, there is a progression from one to the other.)

The major difference can be summed up by saying that the Qu’ran denies the atoning death of Jesus, while the Bible portrays Jesus’ atoning death as the only basis on which God forgives mankind’s death-inducing sin and thereby rescues mankind from death. All else seems rather secondary by comparison.

Now for some general points triggered by a post in this thread.

==============================================================================================

atpollard in Post #24: The God-man became sin. That is based on a mistranslation of 2 Corinthians 5:21: For He has made Him who knew no sin, [to be] sin for us, that we might become [the] righteousness of God in Him.

Paul is here expressing a Hebrew thought within the limitations of the Greek language, In Hebrew, the word that means "sin" (Strong's H2403) also means "sin offering". The word is so translated in Exodus 29:14, for instance. The equivalent words in Greek (Strong's G265 and G266) carry meanings associated only with "sin".

So we see a Hebrew thought being expressed the only way possible in Greek. The Hebrew Christians would have understood that immediately, and explained it to their Pagan Christian associates.

The translators of some Bible versions have been perceptive enough to understand that.

==============================================================================================

atpollard in Post #24 further said: The God-man raised HIMSELF from the dead. That statement is based on John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. and John 10:18: No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father..

However, every other Scripture statement I have found states that God raised Jesus from the dead. E.g. Acts 5:30: The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.. So therefore, because Scripture is not self-contradictory, each of those two verses commonly invoked, has a different, profound meaning of its own.

==============================================================================================

atpollard also said: Christ will raise us to be with him ... glorified and perfect. That is perfectly in line with Scripture teaching. True Christians will be united with Jesus by means of resurrection at his return.

Reading through it over a weekend is hardly studying it in my opinion sir.

As far as what you say about the Christ of GOD; I honestly pegged you for a more intellectually honest individual than what you seem to be conveying. Hopefully I misunderstood you or made some other error on my part.

Christ is the only way; don't get me wrong.

You realize GOD made all creation right? And that GOD is omnipotent, and omniscient?

What I am getting at is that our "sin nature" was knowingly put into us, in our making, by GOD; so only those knowingly going against the Truth are really accountable for their sin, and they surely do not know Christ though they profess the name of Jesus with their mouths.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

Reading through it over a weekend is hardly studying it in my opinion sir.

As far as what you say about the Christ of GOD; I honestly pegged you for a more intellectually honest individual than what you seem to be conveying. Hopefully I misunderstood you or made some other error on my part.

Christ is the only way; don't get me wrong.

You realize GOD made all creation right? And that GOD is omnipotent, and omniscient?

What I am getting at is that our "sin nature" was knowingly put into us, in our making, by GOD; so only those knowingly going against the Truth are really accountable for their sin, and they surely do not know Christ though they profess the name of Jesus with their mouths.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

LOL, your heresy makes me shake my head. Like a magician pulling a rabbit out of your hat you say "abra cadabra" and expect people to believe your hoax.

 

[popsthebuilder]

LOL, your heresy makes me shake my head. Like a magician pulling a rabbit out of your hat you say "abra cadabra" and expect people to believe your hoax.

The fact that you cannot discern the truth of my words is telling regardless of if it is claimed heretical by man or not.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

The fact that you cannot discern the truth of my words is telling regardless of if it is claimed heretical by man or not.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

Discerning your heresy is easy, pops.
You said:

What I am getting at is that our "sin nature" was knowingly put into us, in our making, by GOD

 

[popsthebuilder]

Discerning your heresy is easy, pops.
You said:

So you think GOD made some mistake then? Or do you think GOD is not onmipotent and omniscient?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

So you think GOD made some mistake then? Or do you think GOD is not onmipotent and omniscient?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

I think you misspoke when you said:

What I am getting at is that our "sin nature" was knowingly put into us, in our making, by GOD

What is accurate is:
God ordained that humans would have the capacity to rebel, just as the angels were created with the capacity to rebel. The difference between angels and humans is that God also ordained that he would provide a redeemer for humans.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I think you misspoke when you said:

What is accurate is:
God ordained that humans would have the capacity to rebel, just as the angels were created with the capacity to rebel. The difference between angels and humans is that God also ordained that he would provide a redeemer for humans.

So how did I mispeak then? Please be specific; and please attempt to answer my previous questions to you.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

So how did I mispeak then? Please be specific; and please attempt to answer my previous questions to you.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

You said:

What I am getting at is that our "sin nature" was knowingly put into us, in our making, by GOD

You blame God. You say God put our sin nature into us. That is false.
God did no such thing.
God created us with a capacity to rebel. He ordained that humans would have that capacity. However, humans are fully responsible for their rebellion. They did not rebel because God created them with a natural rebellion...which is what you are claiming.

 

[popsthebuilder]

You said:

You blame God. You say God put our sin nature into us. That is false.
God did no such thing.
God created us with a capacity to rebel. He ordained that humans would have that capacity. However, humans are fully responsible for their rebellion. They did not rebel because God created them with a natural rebellion...which is what you are claiming.

To rebel against GOD is to sin; is it not. That capacitiy is intrinsically in us, is it not? There is one Creator GOD which is all knowing and all powerful; is there not?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

To rebel against GOD is to sin; is it not. That capacitiy is intrinsically in us, is it not? There is one Creator GOD which is all knowing and all powerful; is there not?

It was not originally within humanity. It was not intrinsically within Adam and Eve. It is now within us because that original sin brought rebellion and condemnation upon all of Adams seed.
Yes God created. All that He created was good. Angels and human were ordained with the capacity to rebel against the Creator. Both rebelled. Both suffer the consequences of their rebellion. This took place within God's ordained will. God could have stopped the rebellion before it happened. God in his Sovereignty chose not to stop it.

 

[popsthebuilder]

It was not originally within humanity. It was not intrinsically within Adam and Eve. It is now within us because that original sin brought rebellion and condemnation upon all of Adams seed.
Yes God created. All that He created was good. Angels and human were ordained with the capacity to rebel against the Creator. Both rebelled. Both suffer the consequences of their rebellion. This took place within God's ordained will. God could have stopped the rebellion before it happened. God in his Sovereignty chose not to stop it.

Exactly.....so what is your issue....my wording?

I'm a heretic because I can word things differently; for myself?....

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

Exactly.....so what is your issue....my wording?

I'm a heretic because I can word things differently; for myself?....

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

If you fail to comprehend the difference that is on you to figure out. I have pointed out your misstatement, I will not go over it again.

 

[Pedrito]

popsthebuilder in Post #163 correctly stated (regarding the Qu’ran):

Reading through it over a weekend is hardly studying it in my opinion sir.

That is why I stated in Post #162:

My apologies to popsthebuilder for not getting back to this sooner and with more detailed input.

I still have too many balls in the air to do this properly.

But I must admit to being a little mystified by his statement (also in that Post):

As far as what you say about the Christ of GOD; I honestly pegged you for a more intellectually honest individual than what you seem to be conveying. Hopefully I misunderstood you or made some other error on my part.

So I request clarification regarding what prompted that comment. If I have been remiss in any way, I would like to know about it, so that I can be watchful so as not to give a repeat performance in the future.

 

[popsthebuilder]

My apologies to popsthebuilder for not getting back to this sooner and with more detailed input.

I still have too many balls in the air to do this properly.

So I’ll just throw a thought in that I suspect has been expressed much better by others already.

(popsthebuilder may be aware that I read through the Qu’ran one weekend when on assignment in Fiji, and was confined to the hotel by cyclonic weather. The Koran was in a drawer in my room next to the Gideon Bible. I found the compilation to be a confusing mixture of calls to mercy and calls to violence. I later heard, but never checked up on it, that if the books are read in order of writing, there is a progression from one to the other.)

The major difference can be summed up by saying that the Qu’ran denies the atoning death of Jesus, All else seems rather secondary by comparison.

Now for some general points triggered by a post in this thread.

==============================================================================================

atpollard in Post #24: The God-man became sin. That is based on a mistranslation of 2 Corinthians 5:21: For He has made Him who knew no sin, [to be] sin for us, that we might become [the] righteousness of God in Him.

Paul is here expressing a Hebrew thought within the limitations of the Greek language, In Hebrew, the word that means "sin" (Strong's H2403) also means "sin offering". The word is so translated in Exodus 29:14, for instance. The equivalent words in Greek (Strong's G265 and G266) carry meanings associated only with "sin".

So we see a Hebrew thought being expressed the only way possible in Greek. The Hebrew Christians would have understood that immediately, and explained it to their Pagan Christian associates.

The translators of some Bible versions have been perceptive enough to understand that.

==============================================================================================

atpollard in Post #24 further said: The God-man raised HIMSELF from the dead. That statement is based on John 2:19 Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. and John 10:18: No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father..

However, every other Scripture statement I have found states that God raised Jesus from the dead. E.g. Acts 5:30: The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.. So therefore, because Scripture is not self-contradictory, each of those two verses commonly invoked, has a different, profound meaning of its own.

==============================================================================================

atpollard also said: Christ will raise us to be with him ... glorified and perfect. That is perfectly in line with Scripture teaching. True Christians will be united with Jesus by means of resurrection at his return.

Per Mr. Pedrito's request.

"So I’ll just throw a thought
in."

Me, having respect for your input in general due to reading it in the past and finding it thought out and attention grabbing, was taken aback nearly when you decided to chime in here with what is admittedly a half hazard attempt.

"while the Bible portrays Jesus’ atoning death as the only basis on which God forgives mankind’s death-inducing sin and thereby rescues mankind from death."

You seem to be focusing your doctrine around death and blood....and not moving past such. Did Christ save any while he walked the earth before the destruction of HIS Temple?

Were any saved from eternal destruction before the physical manifestation of the Spirit of GOD in the form of the man Jesus?

To me; going into the very root of one's faith half cocked, and claiming holy writ of any sort to be not truth based on that same eagerness to fire, yet reluctantness to aim is in itself telling to some degree.

Like i said; I guess I just expected or hoped for more from you personally.

I know we are missing one another, and would like to discuss the things you brought up.

Keep in mind that I am not questioning GOD; but your doctrine.

Why would GOD almighty send ITSELF to be a sacrifice and blood payment to ITSELF for the sin of man that HE knowingly instilled in them as potential from creation? How does this said blood payment and sacrificial lamb save one's soul? Please explain it to me. Then explain how if such is the case, then why does scripture say HE is pleased with no blood sacrifice.


peace friend; i am requesting and expecting much of you i suppose, because you seem to have been given much.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

Per Mr. Pedrito's request.

"So I’ll just throw a thought
in."

Me, having respect for your input in general due to reading it in the past and finding it thought out and attention grabbing, was taken aback nearly when you decided to chime in here with what is admittedly a half hazard attempt.

"while the Bible portrays Jesus’ atoning death as the only basis on which God forgives mankind’s death-inducing sin and thereby rescues mankind from death."

You seem to be focusing your doctrine around death and blood....and not moving past such. Did Christ save any while he walked the earth before the destruction of HIS Temple?

Were any saved from eternal destruction before the physical manifestation of the Spirit of GOD in the form of the man Jesus?

To me; going into the very root of one's faith half cocked, and claiming holy writ of any sort to be not truth based on that same eagerness to fire, yet reluctantness to aim is in itself telling to some degree.

Like i said; I guess I just expected or hoped for more from you personally.

I know we are missing one another, and would like to discuss the things you brought up.

Keep in mind that I am not questioning GOD; but your doctrine.

Why would GOD almighty send ITSELF to be a sacrifice and blood payment to ITSELF for the sin of man that HE knowingly instilled in them as potential from creation? How does this said blood payment and sacrificial lamb save one's soul? Please explain it to me. Then explain how if such is the case, then why does scripture say HE is pleased with no blood sacrifice.


peace friend; i am requesting and expecting much of you i suppose, because you seem to have been given much.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

Ouch...the heresy grows thick in your post.
God tells us his elect are chosen from before the foundation of the world. This means those for whom the atonement of God the Son was effectual were graciously saved in all generations.
Your failure to acknowledge the Triune God is sad.

 

[popsthebuilder]

Ouch...the heresy grows thick in your post.
God tells us his elect are chosen from before the foundation of the world. This means those for whom the atonement of God the Son was effectual were graciously saved in all generations.
Your failure to acknowledge the Triune God is sad.

I believe in the trinity; just not that the son is wholly co-eternal with the Father.

And GOD isn't a person or three

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Andrew]

I believe in the trinity; just not that the son is wholly co-eternal with the Father.

And GOD isn't a person or three

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

Just curious brother, what do you mean when you say "i believe in the trinity just...."
What do see as the Holy Trinity? It's accepted well but if you try to explain it you cross into it's 'mystery' and its like stirring up ants when discussing the Godhead... explain to your best ability what the Trinity is to you please because you either accept it or you don't... I found that out the hard way lol

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

[popsthebuilder]

Just curious brother, what do you mean when you say "i believe in the trinity just...."
What do see as the Holy Trinity? It's accepted well but if you try to explain it you cross into it's 'mystery' and its like stirring up ants when discussing the Godhead... explain to your best ability what the Trinity is to you please because you either accept it or you don't... I found that out the hard way lol

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

I expounded on the singular proponent that I do not agree with brother.

If such makes me not a trinitarian then that's fine with me. GOD is my judge.

I do not find that the firstborn is co-eternal with Creator, being created and all.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk