This is why Islam will succeed: Most Catholics in US approve of fornication | Catholic Herald

Pew reports that 74 percent of Catholics have no objections to couples cohabiting – in other words 3/4 of all Catholics accept fornication!

The Catholic Herald reports today:

Nearly three quarters of Catholics in the United States are not opposed to couples cohabiting before marriage, despite the Church’s moral teaching.

A new survey by the Pew Research Center, released Nov. 6, reports that Americans as a whole are very accepting of unmarried couples living together, even if they have no plans to marry. Additionally, Pew found that a shrinking percentage of adults are getting married, and an increasing number of adults have decided to cohabit.

Only 14% of adults surveyed said they did not believe that it was ever acceptable for two unmarried adults in a romantic relationship to live together. An additional 16% said that they agreed with cohabitation only if there were plans for the couple to one day get married.

Of the people surveyed, 69% said they believed it was acceptable for an unmarried couple to live together, without any plans to eventually wed.

In 2002, the National Survey of Family Growth found that while 54% of adults between the ages of 18 and 44 had ever cohabited with a romantic partner, 60% had ever been married. By 2017, the number of adults who had ever been married dropped to 50%, while the number of adults who had cohabitated rose to 54%.

source



Categories: Degeneracy, Fornication, Islam, The Roman Catholic Church

295 replies

  1. watson, ken when is the sharia of matthew going to be applied specifically about cutting out eyes ? christians wanna lose their eternal life…..

    Liked by 3 people

    • He did not mean that literally.

      It was exaggerated / hyperbolic language to say that we need to be serious about cutting out anything that leads to fantasy level lust and sexual sin outside of marriage. (fornication (pre-marital sex), pornography, fantasies, adultery, etc.)

      Like

      • Lol, why is everything “hyperbole” when it requires Christians to make real sacrifices in their lives?

        Like

      • “He did not mean that literally.

        It was exaggerated / hyperbolic language to say that we need to be serious about cutting out anything that leads to fantasy level lust and sexual sin outside of marriage. (fornication (pre-marital sex), pornography, fantasies, adultery, etc.)”

        it is criminals like you that change the sharia of matthew to allow christians to get away with immorality.
        as you can clearly see christians are having lust and sexual sin outside of marriage.

        1. so what happens when it does lead to this?
        2.you said “fantasy LEVEL lust and sexual sin” so WHERE did jesus say that it has to REACH that level? why not just ONE sex thought ?
        3. how do you know what is “hyperbolic” and what is “literal” ? do you pray in congregation or do you pray in secret , is “pray in secret” hyperbol for making your mind as if you are ALONE irregardless if you are with congregation or not?

        Like

      • Quranandbibleblog wrote: Lol, why is everything “hyperbole” when it requires Christians to make real sacrifices in their lives?

        I don’t understand, do you read Matthew 5:29 as to be taken literally and not as a Ken pointed out as hyperbolic language? In whatever way you define sin, I take Ken to be right on the money here in so far as throughout church history it has been understood as hyperbolic language rather than a verse to be taken literally.

        Liked by 2 people

      • “I take Ken to be right on the money here in so far as throughout church history it has been understood as hyperbolic language rather than a verse to be taken literally.”

        we don’t care about “church history” we care about what the author of matthew INTENDED .
        so christians WOULD rather keep their eyes and use them to sin and lose their eternal life?

        how many times have christians used their eyes to sin and used “hyperbolic ” excuse to sin AGAIN with the same eyes?

        what about prayer? do you pray BY yourself or do you pray in congregation and think in your mind that you are praying as if you are alone?

        Like

      • “Those who have committed adultery with their eye and have not plucked it out!! (18:9). Yes, we are to read these literally—if your righteousness does not exceed that of the Torah, you will not be saved is the message here! What do you hold more valuable: your eye or your (eternal) life?”

        so ken, when was the last time you used your eyes to sin and how did your “hyperbolic” bullshit help you? you REDUCE the sharia of matthew to your “hyperbolic” bullshit because you LOVE your eyes and the sin you do.

        Like

      • “Lol, why is everything “hyperbole” when it requires Christians to make real sacrifices in their lives?”

        this is a very beautiful question.

        Like

      • “We don’t care about “church history” we care about what the author of matthew INTENDED”.

        Fair enough, do you think the author Matthew (and Mark) intended this to be understood literally rather than as a hyperbole and if so why?

        Mark 9:47: And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell,

        Matthew 5:29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.

        Matthew 18:9 And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

        Liked by 1 person

      • yes, all one has to do is read the whole of mark and his understanding of “taking up the cross” an d giving things up.

        matthew share the same understanding but matthews version wants to exceed what is found in torah to make the law ABSOLUTELY unbreakable

        Like

      • This is highly implausible and thus not the preferred reading of the overwhelming majority. It is hard to think of an NT scholar who has taken the intended meaning of these verses in Matthew (and Mark) to be literal. Even if there was, your and Faiz’ understanding would at best be an extreme minority view. Ken’s understanding here is really not very controversial or unreasonable.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. ken, your church father jommy swaggart had sex on his mind and the hypocrite was preaching against pornography on the pulpit. the cure for him according to matthews jesus was to lose an eye or both of them….how do you obey HYPERBOL when problem is physical?

    Like

    • All i can see, like faiz says, is that when it comes to REAL giving up christians arent ready, they reduce giving up to “mind giving up,” but the whole message of pagan cross is to lose in order to gain. ken, you love traditions of men and reject sharia of matthew

      Liked by 1 person

    • Why do you call Jimmy Swaggart my church father ?

      He was discredited along time ago and he was a hypocrite and he had a bad theology in his Pentecostalism and charismatic views.

      I have nothing to do with him and he is not my church father .

      Plus you miss spell Jimmy .

      Liked by 1 person

  3. The reason we know it is hyperbole is because even if you could literally physically gouge out your eyes and cut off your hands ( and yet also survive it may bleed to death in the process ) the problem is still in the heart and mind – a person without eyes can still lust and fantasize in his mind and heart .

    The word heart in Matthew 5:28 is talking about the mind and the thinking process – the desires – fantasizing and lusting.

    He’s not talking about normal attraction to a beautiful woman.
    he’s not talking about seeing a beautiful woman and thinking she’s beautiful.
    he’s talking about the second look of lust and desiring to have that person in the heart .

    Which points to the problem of pornography and masturbation – sins according to Matthew 5:30 to 30 .

    The point is to stop lusting and fantasizing in your heart and mind .

    One may Have to cut out TV, movies, time on the Internet and get an Internet filter and / or accountability system in order to take seriously Jesus is command.

    Like

    • “The reason we know it is hyperbole is because even if you could literally physically gouge out your eyes and cut off your hands ( and yet also survive it may bleed to death in the process ) the problem is still in the heart and mind –”

      you haven’t tried it so how would you know?
      and are you saying that jesus was wrong if he is to be taken literally?

      MIND crimes according to jesus have PHYSICAL consequences.

      and it gets worse for you.

      james white says “even my repentance isn’t good enough”

      so then why doesn’t james white cut out his eyes?

      ” a person without eyes can still lust and fantasize in his mind and heart .”

      BUT it would be REDUCED in the sense that ANY new image of a hot woman would not be REPLAYED in the eyes or the heart

      “The word heart in Matthew 5:28 is talking about the mind and the thinking process – the desires – fantasizing and lusting.”

      and jesus tells christians to CUT OFF that which AFFECTS THE HEART AND MIND

      jesus clearly thought that the EYES AND HANDS AFFECTED the heart and mind

      “He’s not talking about normal attraction to a beautiful woman.”

      i said “sex in the heart”

      “he’s not talking about seeing a beautiful woman and thinking she’s beautiful.”

      i was talking about “sex in the heart” just ONE thought for women not married to you


      he’s talking about the second look of lust and desiring to have that person in the heart .”

      “second look” is INTERPOLATION


      Which points to the problem of pornography and masturbation – sins according to Matthew 5:30 to 30 .”

      WHICH REQUIRES THE EYES , HANDS


      The point is to stop lusting and fantasizing in your heart and mind .”

      the point is STOP USING YOUR EYES FOR THESE THINGS OTHERWISE THE PUNISHMENT IS TO LOSE YOUR ETERNAL LIFE

      “One may Have to cut out TV, movies, time on the Internet and get an Internet filter and / or accountability system in order to take seriously Jesus is command.”

      which doesn’t work if you have a perfectly working eye and a hand.

      Like

  4. Another point that needs to be made is that Jesus puts the fault on the man for lusting in his heart .

    he does not fault the woman and say make her cover up completely like in Extreme versions of Islam .

    Of course we believe in modesty and that women should dress appropriately but not the extreme many parts of the most the world is too extreme and oppressive to women .

    ( Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran )

    Like

    • @ Ken

      Keyword “Extrem versions”. They have no proof for their position so it can be discarded. Idk why you think this to be an argument, it would be equivalent to me talking about the Amish to you and saying “like some Christians who refuse to use technology because they think it comes from the Devil”. Islam does not fault the women either and we basically hold a similar view in this regard which is why we “lower the gaze” for people who are not intended for marriage and if one didn’t they have fornicated with the eyes. Quoting poor country areas is like me quoting how hillbillies interpret the Bible.

      Like

    • “Another point that needs to be made is that Jesus puts the fault on the man for lusting in his heart .”

      no he puts it on the eyes and the hands


      he does not fault the woman and say make her cover up completely like in Extreme versions of Islam .”

      how does a woman covering up “completely” mean that “extreme versions of islam” are faulting the woman? what if it is the the womans choice for her own benefit?

      Like

  5. Another problem is the problem with Roman Catholicism is that many Roman Catholics don’t even go to church anymore .
    they just got baptized as a baby and they go on Easter and Christmas but they are not really committed to the Roman Catholic theology it is a giant church of nominalism.

    So the percentage is miss leading because of the nature of the ritualism and nominalism that has taken over Roman Catholicism as a whole .

    More accurate picture would be to do a survey Roman Catholics who are truly committed to the theology of the church and our regular attenders .

    But Islam has the same problem also – Of nominalism .

    Like

  6. I’m willing to grant it could be hyperbolic but saying that plucking out the eyes does not stop one from fornicating and using that as an argument to support the hyperbolic interpretation is flaud. If this had any substance then OT laws for punishment wouldn’t make any sense since same argument can be made for them while we know them to be literal punishments.

    Like

    • Those are not old testament laws .

      Matthew 5:28-30 is saying that the root of adultery and fornication is lusting in the heart and mind .

      Matthew 5:20
      The context is the exposure of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees -pharisaical attitudes are “I am better because I did not commit physical adultery”
      but if the man is constantly lusting in his mind and heart,
      Jesus is saying he is also guilty of adultery in his heart , and the point is the sins in the heart send us to hell not keeping clean on the outside but having hearts full of evil .

      The same for the root of murder and Matthew 5:21 to 26 –
      the roots of murder or anger and hatred in the heart .

      The point is don’t think you’re not guilty just because you did not murder someone literally and just because you did not commit physical adultery .

      You are a guilty sinner because of hatred and sinful anger in the heart and unforgiveness/ bitterness, and sexual fantasies in the heart.
      the root of sinful guilt is in the heart and mind. You are a guilty sinner because of hatred and sinful anger in the heart and unforgiveness and sexual fantasies in the heart the root of sinful guilt is in the heart and mind .

      Mark 7:20-23

      20 And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.
      21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries,
      22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness.
      23 All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”

      Like

      • And this is why Islam does not succeed
        because it is a totally external religion of forcing external society and rituals,
        but it does not deal with the wicked thoughts inside the heart .

        Like

      • “Those are not old testament laws .

        Matthew 5:28-30 is saying that the root of adultery and fornication is lusting in the heart and mind .”

        in the hebrew bible COMMANDS which are violated , punishments for them come in the form of illness and disabilities.

        deut 28

        jesus says BECOME disabled here so you do not burn in hell in the hereafter.

        he thinks that the lusting in heart and mind are from the EYES and hands.

        WHY WOULD THE TORAH GIVE COMMANDS TO TAKE PERSON OUT OF THIS LIFE AFTER X DID A PHYSICAL SIN?


        Matthew 5:20
        The context is the exposure of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees -pharisaical attitudes are “I am better because I did not commit physical adultery”
        but if the man is constantly lusting in his mind and heart,”

        you said “constantly” where is your proof?

        “Jesus is saying he is also guilty of adultery in his heart , and the point is the sins in the heart send us to hell”

        SO what about the PHYSICAL acting of the sins? where do they send us and why in torah the PUNISHMENTS have been to REMOVE the person from his existence?

        ” not keeping clean on the outside but having hearts full of evil .”

        and USING the eyes and hands TO DO WHAT is inside , lust , adultery.

        “The same for the root of murder and Matthew 5:21 to 26 –
        the roots of murder or anger and hatred in the heart .”

        THOUGHT crimes which require, accoridng to jesus EXTERNAL punishment. he clearly linked the two together


        The point is don’t think you’re not guilty just because you did not murder someone literally and just because you did not commit physical adultery .”

        all i can see you doing is make EXCUSES for your eyes, hands and feet. to USE them again and again and repeat your sins.

        “You are a guilty sinner because of hatred and sinful anger in the heart and unforgiveness/ bitterness, and sexual fantasies in the heart.”

        SO HOW DOES REPEATING THIS BS solve the problem ? since this condition cannot be cured , how does jesus tell you to solve it? he says to CUT OUT your eyes so that you do not continue to sin

        the root of sinful guilt is in the heart and mind.”

        and to help this problem jesus tells his followers to cut out their eyes.

        ” You are a guilty sinner because of hatred and sinful anger in the heart and unforgiveness and sexual fantasies in the heart the root of sinful guilt is in the heart and mind .”

        so ken temple is a GUILTY sinner who has hate, lust and anger in his heart.

        NOW MY question is, HOW DOES REPEATING “you are guilty sinner with lust, anger and hate” solve the problem ? all you are doing LIKE A hypocrite is REPEATING yourself while STILL continue to sin in your heart. so what did jesus say to solve this problem ?

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Yeah if you ignore:

        Entire the entire books written on the subject
        https://www.muslim-library.com/dl/books/english_Diseases_Of_The_Hearts_And_Their_Cures.pdf

        https://ia801603.us.archive.org/2/items/PurificationOfTheSoul_201703/Purification%20Of%20The%20Soul.pdf

        https://www.kalamullah.com/hearts.html

        Or a multitude of hadith:

        Narrated An-Nu’man bin Bashir:

        I heard Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) saying, ‘Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.

        https://sunnah.com/bukhari/2/45

        It was narrated that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr said:
        “It was said to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ): ‘Which of the people is best?’ He said: ‘Everyone who is pure of heart and sincere in speech.’ They said: ‘Sincere in speech, we know what this is, but what is pure of heart?’ He said: ‘It is (the heart) that is pious and pure, with no sin, injustice, rancor or envy in it.’”

        https://sunnah.com/riyadussaliheen/1

        ” Verily Allah does not look to your bodies nor to your faces but He looks to your hearts,” and he pointed towards the heart with his fingers.

        https://sunnah.com/muslim/45/41

        (Seriously basically every book of hadith has a chapter dedicated to this):
        https://sunnah.com/urn/1293180

        https://sunnah.com/bukhari/81

        https://sunnah.com/muslim/55

        https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/36

        https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/37

        Or the Quran (which you read that mainly discusses the condition of the heart):

        40:13. It’s He who keeps showing you His signs and sending down nourishment from the sky to sustain you, but who will make an effort to remember except the one who keeps turning back to God with a sincere heart?

        8:2. Real believers are those whose hearts tremble with terror whenever God is mentioned, whose faith strengthens when His revelations are recited to them, who continue to put their trust in their Lord,
        8:3. establishing the prayer and spending on others from what I’ve provided for them.

        22:46. Haven’t they travelled throughout the earth with hearts to understand and ears to listen? It’s not their eyes that are blind, but the hearts within their chest.

        49:14. Some of the Arab nomads say: “We have faith.” Tell them: “You do not have faith. Instead say: “We’ve accepted Islam,” because faith has not yet entered your hearts…

        50:37. There is a powerful reminder in all this for a person with a good heart or who was listening.

        Yeah, I guess we are.

        Liked by 4 people

      • stew, ken temple already knows this. he was exposed on tazkiyyah and ihsaan long time ago. this filth bag has no shame.

        Liked by 2 people

      • There is some talk of inner invisible heart issues, but the over-riding emphasis in Islam is on the external Sharia – law of controlling society through fear and harsh punishments.

        5 pillars of deeds – all external rituals and external actions
        5-6 pillars of belief – doctrinal “that” truths – God, prophets, books, judgment day, angels / demons, Predestination.

        Not much emphasis on pride, selfishness, hatred, unforgiveness, bitterness, arrogance, spite, revenge, greed, lust – the emphasis in Islam is on blaming women rather than men taking responsibility for their own evil thoughts.

        Like

      • Go ahead Stew. Kennywise is asking for you to beat him some more.

        Liked by 1 person

      • “Not much emphasis on pride, selfishness, hatred, unforgiveness, bitterness, arrogance, spite, revenge, greed, lust – the emphasis in Islam is on blaming women rather than men taking responsibility for their own evil thoughts.”

        jesus helped u guys indulge in sin by saying “pick up the first stone”

        Very hypocrite of him

        Like

      • Ken I agree. The heart is sinning even without the visuality. But my point is that this argument does not make something automatically hyperbolic. If you apply this to other things in the bible it won’t hold up. I didn’t say that they were OT laws but applying that logic won’t make things like OT laws hyperbolic.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Because literally gouging our eyes is dangerous and you could bleed to death and it does not solve the problem because the mind and the heart can still lost and commit adultery and fantasies .

        It is obvious that Jesus did not mean this literally, since the mind can still lost and commit sexual sin and adultery in the thoughts.

        Like

      • You can bleed to death from cutting of a hand as well and did that stop the bible from implementing that? No.

        Like

      • ”And this is why Islam does not succeed
        because it is a totally external religion of forcing external society and rituals,
        but it does not deal with the wicked thoughts inside the heart .”’

        Wth are you talking about? This is clearly not true. The Qur’an doesn’t seem to stop talking about the heart and the same goes for the hadith.
        And yes sharia deals with society and how to keep it in check. That’s what laws are supposed to do. What are you even arguing at this point???
        And the OT makes shariah look like the most loose and non-harsh system ever. Yet yhwh enforced it on jews for 13 centuries. Why enforce it for so long if it’s wrong?

        Liked by 4 people

      • @ QB

        Gladly

        @ Ken

        Several points:

        1.You said “some” inner workings after I gave like 20 references (with more I was simply not trying to list EVERY reference) and collections of books on the subject . Sometimes I just don’t even know how to respond to some stuff you say.

        2.The pillars are what makes one a Muslim. I know its weird but we have these things called “established doctrines” and that’s how we avoided your issue of every Tom,Dick and Harry giving his opinion and claiming to be “inspired” by the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, one can do the pillars all day but if one doesn’t have the proper i lntent (which is a matter of the hear and EMPHASIZED before doing any action) is useless. For example, a hypocrite can pray that doesn’t mean God accepted it. We on the outside whether me, you, Paul, or anyone else can only judge that a person did pray.

        3. Challenge for you, please list a reference where women are to be blamed for what men think (after you fail as I know it doesn’t exist, I will list one that says the opposite)

        4.For further demonstration of how little you understand Islam:

        A.Pride/ Arrogance
        “Whoever has a mustard seed’s weight of pride (arrogance) in his heart, shall not be admitted into Paradise. And whoever has a mustard seed’s weight of faith in his heart, shall not be admitted into the Fire.”
        https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/27/104

        B.Selfishness

        …they give them preference over themselves, even if they are poor as well. And those who are saved from the greediness within themselves are truly successful. (59:9)

        But as for the one who’s greedy and thinks they need no one, and lied against what is the Best.I will soon cruise them along the path of the hardest misery. And their wealth will not liberate them when they fall. (92:8-11)

        C.Hatred

        “Shall I tell you about something better for you than charity and fasting? Improving the state of friendship. Hatred is what shaves things away.”

        https://sunnah.com/adab/22/16

        D.Unforgiveness

        Show mercy and you will be shown mercy. Forgive and Allah will forgive you. Woe to the vessels that catch words (i.e. the ears). Woe to those who persist and consciously continue in what they are doing.”
        https://sunnah.com/adab/20/9

        E.Bitterness/Spite

        “Do not desert (stop talking to) one another, do not nurse hatred towards one another, do not be jealous of one another, and become as fellow brothers and slaves of Allah. It is not lawful for a Muslim to stop talking to his brother (Muslim) for more than three days.”

        F.Revenge
        While the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was sitting with some of his companions, a man reviled AbuBakr and insulted him. But AbuBakr remained silent. He insulted him twice, but AbuBakr controlled himself. He insulted him thrice and AbuBakr took revenge on him. Then the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) got up when AbuBakr took revenge.

        AbuBakr said: Were you angry with me, Messenger of Allah?

        The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) replied: An angel came down from Heaven and he was rejecting what he had said to you. When you took revenge, a devil came down. I was not going to sit when the devil came down.

        .https://sunnah.com/abudawud/43/124

        G.Greed

        I asked the Prophet (for some money) and he gave me, and then again I asked him and he gave me, and then again I asked him and he gave me and he then said, “This wealth is (like) green and sweet (fruit), and whoever takes it without greed, Allah will bless it for him, but whoever takes it with greed, Allah will not bless it for him, and he will be like the one who eats but is never satisfied. And the upper (giving) hand is better than the lower (taking) hand.”
        https://sunnah.com/bukhari/81/30

        H.Lust

        “I asked the Messenger of Allaah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) about an accidental glance at a woman. He commanded me to turn my gaze away.”

        https://sunnah.com/abudawud/12/103

        With more btw I just wanted to list some stuff people may nit have read before

        Liked by 3 people

      • OK thanks for the references this is good to know .

        But where does sin come from ?
        how does it start in the soul, the thoughts the mind, and then proceeds out in the actions ?

        Why does Faiz and Mr. HeathCliff mainly spew out insults and hatred and ad hominem methods and dirty talk ?

        Like

      • And Kennywise is down! 1…2…3…4…5…

        Liked by 1 person

      • TO FURTHER WRECK ken temple, i would like to quote the following :

        quote :
        not everyone that prays performs salat. Salat comes from the word Sila ( a connection) and unless one is connected to Allah then what they are doing is simply movements with no connection to Allah and therefore is NOT SALAT. What Allah says is 100% truth. If you pray with the connection you will abstain from fahsha and munkar with no conditions.

        quote :
        ‘The implicit pronoun (we) in the two verbs (na’budu and nasta’īn) refer to the person reciting and those with him of the angels and the other people in the jama’a, or to him and all the believers. The person reciting places his worship within the folds of theirs and mixes his pleas with theirs with the hope that the former may be accepted and answered by the blessing of the latter.’ – Qādi al-Baydāwi in his tafsīr of 1:4.
        This is an important meaning we should try to be mindful of when reciting the fāitha, in prayer and outside. It also highlights the collective aspect of Islamic practice, even in individual worship.

        /////

        Now tell me, isn’t ken temple just a liar for jesus?

        he doesn’t care about the truth.

        Like

      • “5 pillars of deeds – all external rituals and external actions”

        you just got wrecked on the external rituals , now go and get a loaf of bread and cup of wine and fantasies about eating your pagan god (ALL external rituals)

        Like


    • And this is why Islam does not succeed
      because it is a totally external religion of forcing external society and rituals,
      but it does not deal with the wicked thoughts inside the heart .”

      so ken temple is saying that yhwh revealed the torah and had no solution to the problem of lust, hate and anger all “inside the heart”

      ken temple above said ,

      “Of course we believe in modesty and that women should dress appropriately ”

      but the retard for krist forgot that the “problem is in the heart” and that “modesty ” is just a PHYSICAL covering ……

      so why are you wanting to do a physical act when the problem is an invisible one?

      so do you think COVERING reaches the heart and cures its problem ?

      isn’t this the BULLSHIT you are saying ?

      ken temple believes that his heart is DISEASED, filthy and tainted, yet he still wants christian women to “cover modestly” is it because ken BLAMES women in his mind?

      so ken temples god came down and “sacrificed” himself, yet ken temple STILL continues to have LUST, HATE AND ANGER in his heart.

      you make me sick.

      Liked by 2 people

  7. “the problem is still in the heart and mind – a person without eyes can still lust and fantasize in his mind and heart .”

    a person fantasizing in his mind and heart will not be able to

    The word heart in Matthew 5:28 is talking about the mind and the thinking process – the desires – fantasizing and lusting.”

    6“If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. 7Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come! 8If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell

    WOE to the world because of THINGS that cause people to STUMBLE

    WOE TO THE PERSON THROUGH WHOM THEY COME

    so what is the cure:

    If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire

    Like

  8. “The word heart in Matthew 5:28 is talking about the mind and the thinking process – the desires – fantasizing and lusting.”

    so ken temple, DO the eyes, hands and feet CAUSE A PERSON TO STUMBLE, yes or no ?

    Like

    • No. full stop.

      It is the heart and mind that cause the eyes and hands and foot to sin.

      Sin starts in the heart / mind.

      Genesis 6:5
      Jeremiah 17:9
      Mark 7:20-23

      Like

      • “It is the heart and mind that cause the eyes and hands and foot to sin.

        Sin starts in the heart / mind.

        Genesis 6:5
        Jeremiah 17:9
        Mark 7:20-23”

        if sin starts in the heart, jesus told you to LOSE your life.

        become homeless
        Release your money
        let people beat you up
        ABANDON your children
        eat from bin
        cut off your hands and feet

        Do not wash your hands

        no, jesus thought that it was the EYES , hands….which caused people to sin.

        And if YOUR EYES CAUSES U TO SIN

        the CAUSE IS FROM THE EYE

        read psalms

        32.2-5

        Psalm 38.1-3

        Like

      • become homeless
        Release your money
        let people beat you up
        ABANDON your children
        eat from bin
        cut off your hands and feet
        Do not wash your hands

        Obviously you misunderstand the NT completely.

        No one understood things that way, except some extreme desert fathers like Simon Stylites – a nutter.
        Some think Origen did also, but there is debate about him on that.

        Thank God for the Protestant Reformation.

        Like

      • It is you who needs to the read the Psalms.
        You guys already trashed the OT accusing it of being hopelessly corrupted.

        Like

      • “t is the heart and mind that cause the eyes and hands and foot to sin.”

        you are just an apologist for sin.

        you think that jesus did not think EYE causes you to sin, you think that its “the mind”

        Why jebus says that the eyes , foot , hand, and feet will be PUNISHED in hell?

        Like

      • “No one understood things that way, except some extreme desert fathers like Simon Stylites – a nutter.
        Some think Origen did also, but there is debate about him on that.

        Thank God for the Protestant Reformation.”

        ke n temple, thats what jesus wanted of his followers to live a life of pain and suffering because it would hell control sins. these guys u mentioned understand jesus better than u

        Like

  9. 8If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire. 9And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell

    temple uses the following verses :

    20 And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.
    21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries,
    22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness.
    23 All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.”

    childrens hearts DO NOT THINK about ADULTERY while breast feeding.

    even the torah says kids don’t know RIGHT FROM WRONG.

    but the POINT IS THAT all of this stuff

    fornication, theft, murders, adulteries are not “NATURAL ” in the heart BUT LEARNED

    how do you learn them? NOT THROUGH YOUR HEART, BUT THROUGH YOUR FIVE SENSES

    jesus says “cut em off”

    Liked by 1 person

  10. “This is highly implausible and thus not the preferred reading of the overwhelming majority. It is hard to think of an NT scholar who has taken the intended meaning of these verses in Matthew (and Mark) to be literal. Even if there was, your and Faiz’ understanding would at best be an extreme minority view. Ken’s understanding here is really not very controversial or unreasonable.”

    Dr hector avalos

    dr stephen dematai

    both scholars of your bibles say these are meant to be taken literally.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. is it because crosstians have an image of jesus as a loving “turn the other cheek” pagan god and they are letting this image colour their thinking and thats why they are in shock that matthew understood that the only way to exceed righteousness of torah is to get punished for thought crimes?

    Like

  12. i have attempted to post the links 3 times now and they are not going through

    Like

  13. @Benedictus

    “Quranandbibleblog wrote: Lol, why is everything “hyperbole” when it requires Christians to make real sacrifices in their lives?

    I don’t understand, do you read Matthew 5:29 as to be taken literally and not as a Ken pointed out as hyperbolic language? In whatever way you define sin, I take Ken to be right on the money here in so far as throughout church history it has been understood as hyperbolic language rather than a verse to be taken literally.”

    Hi Benedictus. Well, it seems to me that every time Jesus makes a statement that would be extremely difficult or downright impossible to actually do, Christians are forced to claim that it was “hyperbole” or a “metaphor”. So, plucking out your if it causes you to sin is “hyperbole”. Giving away all your wealth is “hyperbole”. Being able to move mountains is a “metaphor” for being able to overcome any obstacle. It all seems rather convenient, don’t you think?

    Liked by 1 person

    • except when you understand that Jesus was using hyperbole to make a point.

      Obviously He meant those things as metaphors.

      “mountains” are symbols of difficult problems to overcome. He never meant you can literally move Mt. Everest or Mt. Tabor or Mount of Olives.

      “giving away your possessions” is hyperbole for don’t make your money and property your idol – which is what the rich young ruler did.

      Jesus believed in the rest of the bible (OT and NT), and obviously one has to work and have SOME money as wages of honest work in order to live.

      the great apostle Paul wrote:

      “if you don’t work, you don’t have the right to eat”
      2 Thessalonians 3:10

      Goes all the way back to Genesis 3 – “man shall earn his living by the sweat of his brow” = hard work

      Like

      • It is only “obvious” to you because you know they are impossible for you to do and are embarrassed by that fact. But when Jesus asked the rich man to give up everything, it is obvious he was NOT simply using “hyperbole”. Otherwise, what would have been the point of telling him that, and then watching him walk away?

        When Jesus withered the fig tree, a literal miracle, he then said to the disciples that they could do greater miracles. How is that a “hyperbole” for removing obstacles that come up in life? The context is a literal miracle. But again, I know why you think this way. It’s an embarrassment that your savior promised you these things but they remain unfulfilled. Thus, you come up with the “hyperbole” argument.

        Liked by 1 person

      • so, what mountain did Jesus literally remove?

        Like

      • None, but that’s why he said that his followers could do greater miracles than just causing a fig tree to wither away. So go on Kennywise. Why don’t you move Mt Everest into the sea? I’m waiting…

        Liked by 3 people

      • I am 100% confident that Jesus did not mean that at all .
        He was talking about the Pharisees lack of fruit the lack of fruit on the fig tree and the desecration of the temple as they were selling and making money and God’s house treating God’s house like a business therefore the mountain of the Lord or the mountain of the house of the Lord that Micah 4 and Isaiah 56 talk about so the mountain is a symbol of the Sins in the mountain that the Temple was on.

        Like

      • “I am 100% confident that Jesus did not mean that at all .
        He was talking about the Pharisees lack of fruit the lack of fruit on the fig tree and the desecration of the temple as they were selling and making money and God’s house treating God’s house like a business therefore the mountain of the Lord or the mountain of the house of the Lord that Micah 4 and Isaiah 56 talk about so the mountain is a symbol of the Sins in the mountain that the Temple was on.”

        Uh huh, sure sure. Whatever he was talking about, he still PHYSICALLY caused the fig tree to wither away. And then he said that the disciples could perform even greater miracles.

        The “100%” confidence of a fool is meaningless. Rest in peace Kennywise the dancing clown.

        Like

      • Yes Jesus physically cursed the fig tree as a symbol of the cursing that is coming up on Israel because of their lack of fruit and their sins because of the hypocrisy and sins God also destroyed the temple which Jesus predicted the cursing of the fig tree is parallel to the cleansing of the temple if you study the passage you might could see this . If you keep reading the passage both and Mark 11 and in Matthew 21 you will see that is about the lack of fruit is real and they were rejection of the Messiah and the prediction of the temple which will be destroyed in 70 A.D. .

        42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures:

        “‘The stone the builders rejected
        has become the cornerstone;
        the Lord has done this,
        and it is marvelous in our eyes’?
        43 “Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. 44 Anyone who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; anyone on whom it falls will be crushed.”

        45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard Jesus’ parables, they knew he was talking about them.

        Matthew 21:42-46

        The issue was the lack of fruit (real faith, god works, new hearts, sincerity, reality, holiness)

        Like

      • “I am still 100% confident that Jesus did not mean that at all . To your face.

        You have zero credibility.

        See Isaiah 56:6-8 and Micah 4:1-2. The mountain of the house of the Lord is about the temple.
        The fig tree and the temple are cursed because of the Jewish leaderships sins and hypocrisy, lack of fruit, and their rejection of the Messiah. God judged the temple in 70 AD as judgment on that generation. Matthew 23:36 to 24:1-3.

        Like

      • I am already resting in spiritual peace with God. I am very much alive with true peace.
        John 14:27
        Matthew 11:28-30
        Romans 5:1

        Which you do not have. you do not have true peace.

        The only way true peace can come to you is for you to repent and trust in the Jesus of the NT – Lord, Savior, Word, eternal, eternal Son, Incarnated, crucified, buried, on the 3rd day risen from the dead with Power – ascended, and at the right hand of God ruling and reigning now in kingdom glory.

        Like

      • ” If you keep reading the passage both and Mark 11 and in Matthew 21 you will see that is about the lack of fruit is real and they were rejection of the Messiah and the prediction of the temple which will be destroyed in 70 A.D. .”

        it is peter who was going to reject jesus and run away like a coward and deny jesus.
        the lack of FRUIT came from peter.
        all throughout mark, the desciples are attacked for their lack of faith, yet still jesus told people he would do GREATER miracles than curising a tree.

        Like

      • NO. Peter repented and Jesus restored him.
        Keep reading to the end of the gospels.

        “Greater Miracles” that Jesus said in John 14:12 does not mean greater in quality – since Jesus rose 3 people from the dead and rose Himself from the dead. You cannot get greater in quality than that.

        What He meant in John 14:12 was greater in quantity – Acts 2:41 and 4:32-35; 6:1; 6:7; 11:26 – thousands and increasing and spreading into new cultures – during Jesus’ ministry the followers were small numbers and so by “greater” Jesus means numbers of true followers and the spread of the kingdom of God.

        Like

      • “NO. Peter repented and Jesus restored him”
        Well, I don’t think your prophet Paul agrees with you, and that’s why he told Galatians that he had rebuked Peter for his hypocrisy!! (Galatians 2:13-14)
        Jesus was not that powerful! He could not change the heart of his most closest disciple! Very sad.

        Liked by 2 people

    • ““giving away your possessions” is hyperbole for don’t make your money and property your idol – which is what the rich young ruler did.”

      he actually didnt do that. he could have used jesus’ escuse “you will always have the poor”

      peter said he has “given everything up”

      In the gospels jesus and his followers SCAVENGE for food

      the truth is that yoi are unable to leave what comfortable life , u hate jesus.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hi quranandbibleblog. Since you commented specifically on the plucking out of eyes (found in Mark 9:47, Matthew 5:29 and 18:9) I asked about if you understand it literally, a point which you did not answer. Ken is simply expressing what is the overwhelmingly agreed-upon understanding of these verses, from the perspective of both ancient and modern scholars. From this vantage point Ken is in good company, though you are free of course to critique the agreed-upon view and furnish us with an alternative understanding.

      Whether that is convenient (and convincing) or not I will let the good people here decide for themselves.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Your appeal to authority and how Kennywise uses it also backfires, because if you were familiar with Kennywise’s strategy, he uses the “ancient” scholars when they suit his purpose, but when they don’t, he throws them under the bus. So clearly, appealing to these scholars proves nothing.

        Also, of course they would interpret the verse the same way you do. They also realized how impossible it was. Thus, they concluded that it must be simply “hyperbole”. The same can be said for basically every command or promise Jesus made that any reasonable person knows is impractical and impossible (e.g., giving up your wealth, moving mountains, etc.). Every time you are confronted with such impracticality, you are forced to appeal to the “metaphor/hyperbole” argument. That’s all very convenient.

        Liked by 3 people

  14. “And this is why Islam does not succeed
    because it is a totally external religion of forcing external society and rituals,
    but it does not deal with the wicked thoughts inside the heart .”

    Kennywise must be living in a fantasy world, because Islam is not only succeeding, it will soon overtake Christianity as the largest religion in the world, inshaAllah.

    And as Stew showed, Islam emphasizes the importance of training oneself through discipline and God-consciousness. So save your empty, inane babble for yourself Kennywise.

    Liked by 5 people

    • It’s all external force in Iran (the people are disgusted with the government & Sharia law) and Saudi (rich oils sheikhs who do orgies and drink alcohol in private) and Afghanistan and Pakistan (but Islam cannot help the heart)

      In the west, it is most biological and immigration growth.

      Yes, secularism has destroyed Christian culture. That is also true.

      But Islam is not really growing by conversion growth. There is some, but not as much as is told, in order to generate fear.

      Mostly immigration, and having large families and multiple wives (sometimes secretly, since polygamy is illegal in most western nations, I think.)

      Like

      • “) and Saudi (rich oils sheikhs who do orgies and drink alcohol in private) and Afghanistan and Pakistan (but Islam cannot help the heart)”

        krist said “pick up the first stone” and let poor people get away with orgies

        Like

      • “But Islam is not really growing by conversion growth. There is some, but not as much as is told, in order to generate fear.”

        LOL, more inane babble from Kennywise the dancing clown. Immigration and having large families may account for MOST of the growth, but all scientific evidence shows that Islam is also showing moderate growth due to conversions. The Pew forum did a study about that a few years ago. In that same study, Christianity is predicted to suffer a net LOSS of 40 million people due to mass apostasy.

        Clowns like you use the “fear” card because of your prejudice and xenophobia.

        Liked by 3 people

      • “Yes, secularism has destroyed Christian culture. That is also true.”

        thats because you are part of the system, you are making your treasure on earth.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @ tony

        Very true. If you look at the lecture from Yassir Qadhi I posted on the democracy post, he shows “secularism” is really just a new sect of Christianity born from the Church’s oppression of Europe.

        Liked by 1 person

    • We have discipline and God-consciousness also, so that is not an answer.

      Yours is empty inane babble. Faizywise clown.

      Like

      • LOL, then give up all your wealth. Prove your inane babble and empty statements. Kennywise the clown keeps destroying his own religion with his hilarious comments. RIP Christianity. You have lost the battle with the Kennywise cancer. Ashes to ashes. Dust to dust.

        Like

  15. “Pew reports that 74 percent of Catholics have no objections to couples cohabiting – in other words 3/4 of all Catholics accept fornication!”

    so they trashed torah law on fornication and jesus’ advice. ken temple says “its all in the heart” and the 74 percent is increasing….

    Liked by 1 person

  16. “There is some talk of inner invisible heart issues, but the over-riding emphasis in Islam is on the external Sharia – law of controlling society through fear and harsh ”

    ken temple is controlled by a system which allows christians to BANG each other and then when time for penalty comes , temple says

    “its all in the heart”
    “Pick up the first stone”

    Like

  17. ““giving away your possessions” is hyperbole for don’t make your money and property your idol – which is what the rich young ruler did.”

    “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money[c] to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”

    ken temples reading

    “If you wish to be perfect, go, KEEP your possessions, and give some of the money[c] to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.”

    Liked by 1 person

  18. “Mark 7:20-23

    20 And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.”

    i bet the catholics love this verse .temple says the his heart is by nature born with adulteries, fornication, lust….so he is simply by nature faulty.

    i said take jesus’ advice

    live a life of suffering

    give up your wealth
    give up your house
    don’t wash your arse
    don’t wash your hands
    eat from bins
    cut off your BALLS
    cut off your EYES

    KEN TEmple LOVES his adulterous and filthy heart.

    what more can i do then tell him that he hates jesus and loves his porn, adultery, lust and hate?

    Like

  19. “Also, of course they would interpret the verse the same way you do. They also realized how impossible it was. Thus, they concluded that it must be simply “hyperbole”. The same can be said for basically every command or promise Jesus made that any reasonable person knows is impractical and impossible (e.g., giving up your wealth, moving mountains, etc.). Every time you are confronted with such impracticality, you are forced to appeal to the “metaphor/hyperbole” argument. That’s all very convenient.”

    beautiful!

    Liked by 1 person

  20. its funny isn’t it that these HYPOCRITES say all the stuff against amalekite peoples , but if they were there , they would be giving them freedom to continue on in their sins.

    torah used “force and control” to stop this lol

    ken temple shot yhwh so badly that there was no need to crucify jesus

    Like

    • ken temple after he had jesus for lunch

      Liked by 2 people

      • An evil heart of revenge and spite is within you 2 guys. (Faiz and mr.healthcliff)
        You have no fruit of goodness and your behavior exposes your false religion.
        Your pride and ad hominem and hatred is open for all to see.

        “You will know them by their fruits” Matthew 7:15-20

        Like

      • The Lord’s supper is symbolic.

        We Protestants are not Roman Catholic and we reject Transubstantiation as wrong, heretical, and even blasphemous, since they have to genuflect before the bread and wine after the priest says the “holy words” that supposedly change bread and wine into Jesus’ flesh and blood.

        Total superstition and unBiblical.

        Like

      • You don’t seem to be able to follow all those Hadith that Stewjo gave about fighting the revenge and spite and hatred in your hearts.

        You have no spiritual power, no Holy Spirit.

        No disciple either over your anger and hatred, even when you have time to be careful of typing. You just let your anger and hatred fly.

        Just texts and rituals.

        A dead powerless religion is Islam.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Which fruits are you talking about?

        1. The pagan beliefs developed through extremism in the exaltation of a righteous person?
        2. The adoption of pagan customs (like Christmas)
        3. The doctrines established over hundreds of years with no proof other than philosophical arguments? (again born from Greek paganism)
        4. The mass forgeries of Scripture?
        5. The mas misquotes of Scripture?
        6. The mass ignorance about Scripture, with most congregants never even reading the text they claim to believe in despite being literate nowadays?
        7. The mass contradictions in Scripture?
        8. The lack of an agreed-upon canon or how it was established?
        9. How worship has become essentially a good person’s version of going to the club?
        10 . The mass deception of fake miracles to “strengthen faith”? (You can add all the Catholic church, your TV preachers, “spiritual surgery etc. here)

        (Inhale)

        11. The repression of the sciences?
        12. The fact that any land governed by the Church was a repressive, backward hellhole? (Unless it was already powerful before its adoption)
        13. The birth of liberal secularism (another sect) to throw off the oppressive yoke of the Church?
        14. The largest forceful exodus of people in the world (Atlantic Slave trade)
        15. Chopping of genitals of those people in one part of said exodus (Trans-Saharan slave trade)
        16. The multiple Crusades (including the ones against each other) that killed so many civilians they were literally “up to their ankles in blood and eating corpses”?
        17. The Spanish Inquisition which led to the torture of various sects and infidels? Which led to Spain being called the “Defenders of the Faith” by the Church?
        18. Manifests destiny?
        19. The Conquistadors?
        20. Colonialism (yes it was religiously motivated)

        (Inhale)

        20. The doctrine of Perpetual servitude?
        21. The “White man’s burden”?
        22. The Holocaust?
        23. That when someone thinks “religious corruption” the Church is the first image that pops up in their mind?
        24. The supporting of displacing people from their homes in an effort to cause the false doctrine called the “Rapture” to occur as if they can make God do things on their time?
        25. Siding with people whom you believe “killed God” so that “God” will come back and kill them?
        26. No clear way to run societies other than general philosophy?
        27. That Christians are the only group of people in the world that have the distinction of wiping out 3 continents worth of nations?

        Is this the path that will bring everyone peace? Are those the fruits we will know the truth by Ken?

        Liked by 4 people

      • “You have no spiritual power, no Holy Spirit.”

        how does the shedding of a human body give your ADULTEROUS /MENSTRUAL BLOOD heart “spiritual power” ?

        HOW does imagining PHYSICAL blood give your heart “power”

        you SHIT AND STAINED man. you WHORE in your heart man. don’t tell me shit about hearts, when you ARE FULL of FILTH in your heart.

        Like

    • The rotten fruits of Christianity! The list just seems going!

      Like

  21. Ken Temple said “because it is a totally external religion of forcing external society and rituals,
    but it does not deal with the wicked thoughts inside the heart

    Besides that you’re a liar here, and you simply have no idea what you’re talking about, let me tell you that the battle your prophet Paul invented between the “external religion” & the “internal religion” is really stupid.
    It’s not even compatible with the teachings of the Hebrew bible nor Jesus, and of course not with Islam.

    You see, you’re not that different from the jews whom Jesus used to refute, but you’re from the other side of the equation. You’re both wrong, and you need Islam to accomplish the harmony between the commandments of God and their effects on the heart. There’s no contradiction whatsoever between the commandments of God and dealing with the wicked thoughts inside the heart as the religion of Paul thought! Both are working in harmony. We have societies and individuals. That’s why Christianity is a big failure in the history of humanity when it comes to the societies. It has been riding and adopting secular and pagan regulations and rules shamelessly. Christianity provides nothing literally. In fact, even in the level of individuality, we have seen that the teaching of Christianity has a really disastrous effect on those who choose to not being married as your prophet Paul commanded! Paul, who invented this stupid battle, had a negative attitude towards the body and the marriage!, but we know how that ended with Christians such as Catholics. And there are more examples.

    On the other hand, Islam is something else. Islam is comprehensive teachings for the heart and the body, for the individual and the society. It cannot be compared with anything else. Islam is outside the scope of comparison, and it cannot be put in the same level with your Pauline religion!
    Finally I’ll end with this saying of Jesus which refutes the religion of Paul. Jesus said “Woe to you Pharisees, because you give God a tenth of your mint, rue and all other kinds of garden herbs, but you neglect justice and the love of God. You should have practiced the latter without leaving the former undone
    Do you want to see your religion, Ken? Just reverse this verse. But Islam and Jesus are telling you that both are required.
    Thus We made you a moderate/just community, that you may be witnesses to humanity, and that the Messenger may be a witness to you..” QT.
    Thank Allah for Islam.

    Liked by 4 people

  22. the biggest problem i see here is that all this “heart” talk is NOT REALLY ot talk, i have academic evidence for this

    quote:

    [–]echindod 3 points 5 months ago
    The answer to your first question is: No. The authors of the Torah most certainly did not split the “laws” into “Civil”, “Ceremonial”, and “Moral”. That is a nice western division that made Christian theology more convenient, but its certainly not historical, and not part of the ANE conception of Covenant and Ritual.

    The bigger answer to your question is that in the ANE, Sacrifices are food for the gods. The gods got tired of working the fields, so they made humans to do it for them. The purpose of humanity is to provide food for the gods, the gods then in turn provide rain and military strength to the humans that provide the sacrifice. This is just quid pro quo. Everyone gets what they need and everyone is happy. You can see “evidence” for this even in some Israelite conceptions because you have P saying that sacrifices are a “pleasing aroma” to Yahweh. Also, then you have the prophets saying that Yahweh does not need food. They probably wouldn’t have bothered saying it if no one was believing it.

    However, this quid pro quo is not the main conception of Israelite sacrifice. If many Israelites agreed with the prophets and said that Yahweh didn’t need food, what is the purpose of sacrifice? One of the central purposes of stipulations in the Torah is part of the covenant obligations of being a vassal to Yahweh. Deuteronomy is written as a Suzerain Vassal Treaty between Yahweh and Israel, and these stipulations are part of what Israel needs to do to maintain their part of the relationship. This is where all of the food laws, and “moral” laws, and even the “civil” laws fit in. (I know they aren’t really moral and civil…or even laws, I am just using this as shorthand for because I am lazy)

    But what about specifically sacrifices? The sacrifices themselves are much more about sanitizing the temple. In Israel, for all of the minor infractions of the covenant, and for all of the non-holy things that might be accidentally engaged in, it would be like filth that would collect in the temple. If the filth accumulated to much, there was the danger of the Deity leaving the temple (Which happens in Ezekiel. Ezekiel says Yahweh gets up and leaves the temple). Many of the sacrifices are designed to sanitize the holy utensils and spaces to remove this filth that accumulated.

    There is nothing really internal, or about the heart in any of this.

    If you want to read more about this I would suggest: – Moshe Weinfeld’s book Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomic School (there are some great essays about Deuteronomy being a Treaty formula here) – John Walton Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament and The Lost World of Torah. (This first book maybe more of what you are looking for if you are interested in ANE “metaphysics”. Its a systematic look at the underlying philosophical ideas that shaped ANE thinking and how that relates to the bible. The second book is about what the Torah is, as a genre and in the context of Israelite covenant). – Milgrom’s Anchor Bible Leviticus (has a lot of good work on what sacrifices mean and how they work). – Feder Blood Expiation in Hittite and Biblical Ritual: Origins, Context, and Meaning (there aren’t many comparisons with the bible and the use of blood in rituals, but this book looks at the Hittite rituals that look at this. Not sure everything in here is right, but it is a good starting point).

    Peteat6PhD | NT Greek 1 point 5 months ago
    I don’t think the Hebrew Bible distinguishes the body and the person to that degree. If your body is defiled, you are defiled.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. ken temple get destroyed by the hebrew bible, when jesus said that your eyes CAUSE u to sin, then this really means jesus of nt thought that eyes were responsible and one should pluck em.

    Like

    • You guys trashed the Hebrew Bible earlier, claiming that the Dead Sea Scrolls and Masoretic Texts (600s to 900s AD)
      AD) were not good enough, since the oldest copies are from around range of 300 BC-100 AD, (DSS), so you have no good point at all.

      “Scholarly consensus dates these scrolls from the last three centuries BCE and the first century CE.[2] ”

      Of we still believe in God’s law, the moral law and principles from the ceremonial laws and Judicial / political laws for Theocratic Israel still apply in many ways.

      Christians have always believed in the death penalty by the state for first degree murder (and rape, and some others) after due process of judicial process.

      Romans 13:1-8

      Therefore, you are all wrong.
      Boom.

      Like

      • @ Ken

        Used frequently to keep slaves under control and oppressed while sounding like something a sellout to an oppressive government would right.

        Boom.

        Liked by 1 person


  24. LOL, then give up all your wealth. Prove your inane babble and empty statements.”

    its all about the heart bro, ken temple, even if he gave it up would still DREAM ABOUT millions of dollars. its not his fault bro, his heart is made like that.

    these kuffar are just BLAMING THE ALMIGHTY.

    Like

  25. Also the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord,
    To minister to Him, and to love the name of the Lord,
    To be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath
    And holds fast My covenant;
    7 Even those I will bring to My holy mountain
    And make them joyful in
    My house of prayer.
    Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar;
    For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples.”

    8 The Lord God, who gathers the dispersed of Israel, declares,
    “Yet others I will gather to them, to those already gathered.”

    Isaiah 56:6-8
    The last line of verse 7 is quoted in Mark 11:17

    It is obvious that the mountain that Jesus is talking about is the mountain of the house of the Lord them out on which the temple is he is rebuking the Pharisees for turning the mountain and the house of the Lord that is the temple into a den of the house and into a business rather than a house of prayer for all the nations so in a sense this is a prediction of the destruction of the temple which is on the mountain of the house of the Lord – prediction of 70 a day when the temple is destroyed which is on the mountain of the Lord .

    This is the mountain that the disciples are to speak against; the mountain that has no fruit, the big thing that is blocking reality and holiness in their life is the lack of fruit on the fig tree; it is the sin in the temple ;
    the removal of the mountain is the removal of the temple and 70 a day because they rejected true religion and they rejected their messiah who came to them. This is the mountain that the disciples are to speak against – the mountain that has no fruit the big thing that is blocking reality and holiness in their life the lack of fruit on the fig tree is the sand in the temple the removal of the mountain is the removal of the temple in 70 A.D. because they rejected true religion and they rejected their Messiah who came to them

    Like

  26. 4 And it will come about in the last days
    That the mountain of the house of the Lord
    Will be established as the chief of the mountains.
    It will be raised above the hills,
    And the peoples will stream to it.
    2 Many nations will come and say,
    “Come and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord
    And to the house of the God of Jacob,

    Micah 4:1-2 also shows that the mountain of the house of the Lord is what Jesus is talking about when he says speak to the mountain to be removed he means remove the hypocrisy from the temple remove your lack of fruit the cursing of the fig tree is judgment on the lack of fruit in your life.
    repent of your lack of fruit

    Like

  27. “Because literally gouging our eyes is dangerous and you could bleed to death ”

    ken temple protesting against his saviours instruction. the POINT is jesus DIDN’T give a TOSS about human suffering, thats why he tells you to TURN your other fukin cheek, PRAY for those who BEAT the shit out of you.
    love your enemies.
    when christians are being persecuted, they should just ABSORB the persecution and pretend it is heaven in mind.

    plus, your SHIT “argument” assumes that jesus was BIOLOGICAL minded.

    jesus’ mission was to teach christians to LOSE their life on earth and give up tresures but so for you are AGREEING that your LIFE is MUCH more better than what jesus asked how your life should be.


    and it does not solve the problem because the mind and the heart can still lost and commit adultery and fantasies .”

    you HAVEN’T even tried it.

    PLUS, the logic is that it is BETTER to CONTROL the mind and HEART than TO USE the eyes and CONTINUE TO SIN.

    DO CHILDREN LEARN FROM THEIR MOTHERS WOMBS LUST AND ADULTERY, SNAKE?


    It is obvious that Jesus did not mean this literally,”

    yes he did, the EYE causes the SIN!
    thats what he thought
    thats what TORAH thought


    since the mind can still lost and commit sexual sin and adultery in the thoughts.”

    SO jesus gives you ADVICE

    LOSE YOUR treasures . you don’t want to.

    Like

    • the whole message of the cross is to live a life of SUFFERING and ken temple is talking about danger?
      you are SO AFRAID LITTLE chicken that you are NOT READY to give up your comfortable RICHES, house , cars, phones, internet

      ken, when was the last time you used your hands and eyes to do a sin? did you BLAME THE problem on your mind? then why did your god PUT LUST, ADULTERIES, THEFT, EVILS OR IF YOU ARE A DEIST WHY did yhwh “allow” satan TO put all this in your mind? and WHY IS IT MY FAULT WHEN it is natural and WHY on d.o.j WILL the eyes, hands and feet RECEIVE punishment when it was FLESHLESS mind ?

      1. where did jesus tell christians to make crosses out of gold and hang them around their necks and “share in suffering” ? HOW are you DEMONSTRATING your loyalty when you are just DOING A ritual of wearing?

      Like

      • PSALM 38

        jesus said eyes CAUSE sin
        psalm 38
        psalm 32.2-5 also sees the same link as jesus.

        there is clearly a link between body PARTS and SINS .

        “and it does not solve the problem because the mind and the heart can still lost and commit adultery and fantasies .”

        so jesus ASKS u to LOSE YOUR eye because you have CUT out one problem and that is to use your eyes to help you see the sins.

        jesus even tells you to HATE your life

        “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, even their own life–such a person cannot be my disciple.

        Like

      • “and WHY IS IT MY FAULT WHEN it is natural and WHY on d.o.j WILL the eyes, hands and feet RECEIVE punishment when it was FLESHLESS mind ?”

        and why did yhwh have to CREATE a body and get it “sacrificed” for sins when it was all spiritual?

        yes, the body was created because the creators of the story thought that the physical was what CAUSED the sins

        Like

    • ” . . . your other fukin cheek, PRAY for those who BEAT the shit out of you.

      your low character of cursing and dirty language exposes you as not credible and demonstrates your religion cannot give you power to control yourself at the keyboard.

      Just think how much you probably for sure curse all the time in daily life – you just let it fly verbally and with anger, since you have no self -control when typing and opportunity to be careful – this means you are full of anger and dirty talk all the time.

      You expose your religion of Islam as vacuous and empty.

      Like

      • “Just think how much you probably for sure curse all the time in daily life – you just let it fly verbally and with anger, since you have no self -control when typing and opportunity to be careful – this means you are full of anger and dirty talk all the time.”

        your heart is by nature created like that. According to you , ot was made to show u how filthy u r. what self control do you have you liar for jesus?
        i have no respect for one who says children are born damaged and stained with sin.

        so since you dont let it fly by and use it when time is right, what difference is there? You still let it “fly by” when opportunity comes, right?

        Like

  28. You are all ignorant of the science of hermeneutics – the science of proper interpretation, according to context, background, grammar, literary genre, author’s intention, and harmony with rest of Scripture. (OT and NT)

    Like

    • @ Ken

      Like the NT authors?

      So he got up, took the Child and His mother by night, and withdrew to Egypt, 15where he stayed until the death of Herod. This fulfilled what the Lord had spoken through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called My Son. (Matt 2:14-15)

      What was actually written:

      1When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son. But the more I called Israel, the farther they departed from Me… (Hosea 11:1-2)

      Liked by 3 people

      • On Hosea 11:1-2 being quoted in Matthew 2:14-15 – This is no problem, since “the “son” language in the OT is part of this Messianic Matrix” (D. Carson, Matthew, page 119, also Willis Beecher, 1905). Hosea 11:1 is about Israel’s exodus out of Egypt and it looks forward to the ultimate one – the son of God, the Messiah, who is the seed of Abraham and David, and from Israel. Genesis 12:1-3; 18:18; 22:17-18; Isaiah 49:6; Psalm 2, 89, 2 Sam. 7, etc., Galatians 3:16 – the Messiah is the one seed out of the seeds / descendents of Israel. Since Islam believes Jesus is the Messiah / Al Masih, and the modern Jews reject that, you are unable to provide credible exegesis that refutes that from their perspective; as even the Pharisees and the Jewish high priest knew that the Messiah would be the Son of God – Mark 14:60-64 (and Messiah, and son of David, exalted son of man at Yahweh’s side, and Lord – Psalm 110:1, Psalm 2:1-12; Daniel 7:13-14; Mark 14:60-64) Jesus said He is the fulfillment of all of this previous Scripture. Matthew 22:44-46

        Since I already gave lots of verses that Jews today believe is about the Messiah, but the word “Messiah” is not used in any of those verses, that is ok also with all the verses that the NT uses for the Messiah, and yet we Christians are the ones that has the specific verses with the word “Messiah”. (Daniel 9:24-27; Psalm 2:1-12 – Messiah and Son is in that Psalm).

        Jesus is the fulfillment of the “type” (and OT figure that pre-figures the future Messiah and prophesy fulfilled in the NT) of recapitulation of Israel and their temptation in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-11 – from Deuteronomy 6-8 and 3 quotes) and since Israel is the vine that not bring forth the expected fruit (Isaiah 5), Jesus, by contrast is the True Vine (John 15) that does bring forth fruit.
        The virgin conception and birth makes Jesus the Son of God – and also since Islam confirms the virgin birth, indirectly affirms everything I have written, even though Islam denies the incarnation and Sonship of Jesus. Islam is an Anti-Christ (Dajjal) religion. 1 John 2:18-28)

        The Father also said Jesus is My beloved Son, and so Hosea 11:1 and the exodus from Egypt is fulfilled in Jesus being taken to Egypt and also coming out of Egypt after the danger of Herod was passed.

        Yes, it all true and God’s holy word and defeats the 600 late false religion of Islam.

        Like

    • Please, Ken! Give us a break! What kind of hermeneutics you’re talking bout? You mean the fact that you twist the normal language of the human beings to fit your imaginary reading? Or the fact that you’re just being dishonest with the clear mistakes in your bible? Let’s face it, Ken! The game of literal/metaphorical interpretation is being played/exploited inconsistently within the same chapter with your “science of hermeneutics”! Sometimes within the same verse even! After all, this status of “harmony” is evidently found from very beginning when your scripture got written! Do you remember how Matthew’s author invented the story of Jesus being riding on two donkeys just to make it match with so called prophecy in Zachariah 9:9? Don’t let me start with your prophet Paul’s’ writings even, so what we would expect from fallible people like you? In fact, christian missionaries have been proven to be liars and dishonest many times!
      Why don’t you accept the fact that you’re dealing with muslims, and the lies and emotional preaching don’t actually work with muslims!? Yes, it’s hard thing to do, but again it’s very clear that christians are losing the debate with muslims! Also, why do get angry from Faiz while you don’t show any kind of respect for us by not engaging with us with a meaningful manner! Instead you just get so repetitive
      with many nonsensical comments you make! You are like James White! You’re so showy with this artificial humbling while in fact it’s very clear that you’re arrogant.

      Liked by 4 people

      • 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 Bravo again brother Abdullah! You are just on the money this week, good show ol chap.

        Like

      • a lie is when someone knows something to be one way, but speaks in contradiction of that, hiding something they did.

        So, since we sincerely believe the NT is the fulfillment of the OT and everything in is God’s holy word, God-breathed, and true, both to history and theology;
        therefore, WE ARE NOT Lying.

        Quit saying that.

        There is no invention of Zechariah 9:9 – it is true and Jesus fullfilled that.

        Paul’s writings also God-breathed.

        I have engaged in a meaningful manner. It is Faiz and mr.heathcliff that don’t. and stewjo sometimes and likes a lot of their dirty comments.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Lol, what? The passage isn’t even a prophecy dude. Again let Mormons do this with Joseph Smith then. Its a bunch of verbal gymnastics and bs to deny how normal people would read the text. Don’t get mad at me because I don’t blindly swallow the crap you say.

        Next, I call you a liar because you are. This isn’t meant to “hurt your feelings” and I don’t want you to be confused, I ACTUALLY believe you are a liar and even if we knew each other in person would take what you say about anything with a grain of salt. You repeat crap that is refuted thoroughly in the hopes of misguiding someone and so that makes you a liar. You spread misinformation and earn sins for every word you write on your blog and call others toward.

        Finally, I like their comments because they say some funny stuff.

        Liked by 2 people

      • a lie is when someone knows something to be one way, but speaks in contradiction of that, hiding something they did.
        To be honest, I think many christian missionaries are simply liars. The time of the colonial period to the 80s, christian missionaries had evidently been found to be liars and deceptive.We can easily sense that, and that’s why Ahmed Deed at, by the Help of Allah, could easily expose them although some of his opponents were with a phd degree! It seems christian missionaries, after the era of Ahmed Deedat, started to change their strategy little bit, which you can find clearly with some debates with christians such as the old debates of James White with muslims in which he virtually was just preaching when he got cornered. I think muslim debaters have schooled christians something in this field, especially when the arrogant christians got really whipped with the floor by muslims. After that, the western christian mentality realized that they are not dealing with Mormonism.

        since we sincerely believe the NT is the fulfillment of the OT …”
        Maybe you really believe, Ken. But I really doubt that you’re sincere when it comes to this foundation of your belief. I just cannot sense this sincerity!
        What seems to be obvious is that you’ve already believed because of the comfort zone you’re afraid to lose, and the desire you want. I cannot sense that your belief is because of something in the bible. But I can see now that many christians start to admit that the bible is not the foundation of their belief. And to be honest, it’s very clear why!
        Your bible doesn’t present the idea of god-man as what you(i.e. christens) do today. In fact, what’s clear in it is quite the opposite, and what’s left is only ambiguous passages on which christians use all the gymnastic and insane interpretations to convince themselves with the belief they have already adopted, so in short, no! I don’t think you’re sincere. If we want to talk about your hypocrisy and being inconsistent with some matters, the case is really closed.

        I can say that arrogance is really a key factor why christians don’t want to accept Islam. Sadly, some christians even have chosen to be just rabid dogs in this battle between the truth and the falsehood such as Sam and David. This direction is indeed an acknowledgement that they have lost the battle with Islam.

        Be humble before that words of God, Ken. Ask Him to guide you and open your heart!
        O People of the Book! Why do you reject the revelations of God, even as you witness?. O People of the Book! Why do you confound the truth with falsehood, and knowingly conceal the truth?” QT.

        Liked by 1 person

    • “the science of proper interpretation, “…

      LOL!! The “science” of “proper interpretation” he says! Man, you can’t make this stuff up!

      Liked by 1 person

  29. Proverbs 16:18

    Proverbs 11:2

    Like

  30. The reason why ken temple has to make physical commands into hyperbole is because he thinks that the body he worships( body of jesus) has already done “internal struggle” on his behalf so what ken temple continues to say is

    “pick up the first stone”

    why would he need to “perfect” a adulterous heart when the BODY he worships was purposely built to show temple that he menstrual rag ?

    so ken temple cannot

    1. Give up internet
    2.his cash
    3.his house
    4.his family
    5.his life

    Because he thinks none of this will work for his adulterous and menstrual rag stained heart

    James white said “even my repentance isnt good enough”

    so why does the body worshipper continue to talk about “its from the heart” ?

    he is admitting christianity is not making changes in his life

    Like

  31. “NO. Peter repented and Jesus restored him.
    Keep reading to the end of the gospels.”

    i read the gospel of mark, i don’t see where peter and jesus “kiss and make up”

    ““Greater Miracles” that Jesus said in John 14:12 does not mean greater in quality – since Jesus rose 3 people from the dead and rose Himself from the dead. You cannot get greater in quality than that.”

    so how do you get “not GREATER in quality ” WHEN mark uses the word? he tells peter that if they command a MOUNTAIN to dunk itself, it will be done.

    how do you know “jesus rose people from the dead” ?

    jephtahs daughter was SLEEPING

    jesus said she was not dead

    so what happens to HYPERBOLE bs when it is not convenient ?

    how is “RAISING people from dead” “greater ?

    what about MOVING the sun or HAVING YOUR SHADOW go over people and get a cure(acts)?

    a shadow CURING some one is GREATER than COMING back from the dead

    AND pagans knew of stories where people ROSE from the dead

    https://old.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/ds4dc3/m_david_litwa_on_n_t_wright_and_resurrection/?st=k2owmvyp&sh=232bfee3

    eliyah ROSE bones from the dead

    “What He meant in John 14:12 was greater in quantity – Acts 2:41 and 4:32-35; 6:1; 6:7; 11:26 – thousands and increasing and spreading into new cultures – during Jesus’ ministry the followers were small numbers and so by “greater” Jesus means numbers of true followers and the spread of the kingdom of God.”

    lol, he is NOW forcing john into mark. TWO different authors.

    i don’t care about your filthy original sin stained interpretation.

    the “spread ” of the message is THROUGH “greater miracles” lol

    Like

  32. “Which you do not have. you do not have true peace.

    The only way true peace can come to you is for you to repent and trust in the Jesus of the NT – Lord, Savior, Word, eternal, eternal Son, Incarnated, crucified, buried, on the 3rd day risen from the dead with Power – ascended, and at the right hand of God ruling and reigning now in kingdom glory.”

    the arrogant adulterous stained heart has spoken again. jews tell you they have PEACE in their torah and you can KEEP your pagan blood god

    i quote :

    The most important line in the universe of the Jewish prophets is the one that delineates between Creator and created. The One is to whom all worship is due and the other owes all worship. The writers of the Christian Scripture blurred that line by encouraging worship to someone who owed worship himself and instead introduced a new line of demarcation. In the universe of the Christian Scripture the most important line in the universe is the one that divides believer (in their idol) and non-believer. Your comments on this blog, full of dire admonitions, reinforce this, You stand on one side of your “important line” and you throw your meaningless threats over your sad wall. Let me say this about your threat. We reject your idol and we were saved from all of the evil that accompanied the followers of your idol and we were blessed spiritually in this same time. One sign of the blessing is that we still have God’s Sabbath and His Passover celebration, you have the pagan Sunday and Easter. The evidence is staring you in the face – from the very first verse in the Jewish Bible unto the very last – the underlying theme of this holy book is that you owe every iota of your existence to the One Creator of heaven and earth. As long as you are alive – the door is still open.

    Like

    • “since Jesus rose 3 people from the dead and rose Himself from the dead. You cannot get greater in quality than that.”

      a pagan dependent being NEEDING other persons to raise himself in body is something to boast about ?

      jesus said that if the people HAD true faith , they could have come to the tomb and RAISED him (jesus) back to life.

      Like


  33. An evil heart of revenge and spite is within you 2 guys. (Faiz and mr.healthcliff)
    You have no fruit of goodness and your behavior exposes your false religion.”

    so ken, was it morally right to bomb thousands of iraqi children?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ephesians 6:12
      John 18:36
      Matthew 26:52

      That, if children died it was unintentional, and it was not done by a church or Christian organization; it was done by a secular government, in response to Saddam Hussein’s agenda after 13 years of lying to the UN nuclear inspectors and giving impression he was hiding weapons and possibility he would shelter Al Qaeda types, and later in response to Mosab Al Zarqawi, later Isis, etc.

      Like

      • faiz , you reading this filth bro?

        Liked by 1 person

      • “, if children died it was unintentional, ”

        was it morally right to bomb children?

        Liked by 1 person

      • ” 13 years of lying to the UN nuclear inspectors and giving impression he was hiding weapons and possibility he would shelter Al Qaeda types, and later in response to Mosab Al Zarqawi, later Isis, etc.”

        here the guy is making an argument why it is okay to “unintentionally ” bomb thousands of children. who made white house chief on lying ? your president (christian) received a blow job
        bush got planes to fly into trade center because jesus died for his sins.
        who made u white boys chief on truth and falsehood?

        so what if saddam hussain gave impression on hiding weapons? who made white boys chief on anything ? what is your problem with al qayda types when you live in a country full of terrorists?

        Liked by 1 person

      • It was not the church dummy.
        Matthew 26:52
        John 18:36
        Ephesians 6:10-20

        Like

      • “That, if children died it was unintentional, and it was not done by a church or Christian organization; it was done by a secular government, in response to Saddam Hussein’s agenda after 13 years of lying to the UN nuclear inspectors and giving impression he was hiding weapons and possibility he would shelter Al Qaeda types, and later in response to Mosab Al Zarqawi, later Isis, etc.”

        This vile clown is making excuses for the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children by his evil government’s sanctions. We shouldn’t be surprised though. Remember that this evil clown makes the same excuses for his pagan god’s genocidal commands in the Bible. These are the evil and rotten fruits of Christianity.

        The Iraq wars was supported by the Evangelical Christian. There are even cases of American pilots putting graffiti on their bombs inspired by the Bible, such as “Babylon has fallen! And so has this (the bomb).” These evil pagans saw these wars as new crusades, a chance to avenge the humiliation of Christians at the hands of Muslims during the Crusades.

        Liked by 3 people

      • @ QB

        Isn’t it strange how Ken will brag about governments that are Judeo/Christian when talking about economy and technology but when it comes to atrocities and oppression all the sudden “they aren’t true Christians” even though it was heavily supported by Christians (who continue to make jokes about it)? I just find the whole thing weird…

        Like

  34. “Of we still believe in God’s law, the moral law and principles from the ceremonial laws and Judicial / political laws for Theocratic Israel still apply in many ways.

    Christians have always believed in the death penalty by the state for first degree murder (and rape, and some others) after due process of judicial process.”

    you have the jekyl and hyde syndrome.

    “still apply in many ways” BUT they are NOT NECCESSARY by pauline religion. meaning you can do them IF you want and they WON’T BRING you closer to god or CHANGE your heart, because ACCORDING filthy SLIMY stain like you “torah did not BRING ABOUT A way to control problem of lust, hate and anger”

    to QUOTE ihsaan :

    Good works
    Allan,
    Firstly, yes Western style secularism can affect anyone including Muslims.
    However, Islam and Christianity are very different in the respect that Islam offers a divine law, a moral guidance, a code of conduct, that ushers one down a righteous path, while Christianity is simply lacking in this regard, there is no law, no boundary, no straight path to guide the believer whatsoever. This is why when the Christian falls into error, it is often directly because of the misguidance which stems from his Christian religious belief that he is “free from the law” and that he is already saved through faith based redemption.
    Whereas, when the Muslim errs, it is not because of Islam, but in spite of it. And although I agree with you, that some Muslims choose not to follow Islamic and Qur’anic teachings, that is ultimately the fault of the person and not the fault of the religion itself.
    Secondly, If someone claims to be a Christian but doesn’t act like it or commits sinful deeds, he is still considered by his co-religionists to be a “good Christian” (or at the very least a Christian) since it is often unclear as to how a Christian should conduct himself, given that he is already saved (Paul’s Gospel of Freedom from the Law, and faith based redemption). Paul even writes that good deeds are like filthy rags, they are not required since one is already saved through the atonement. In his letter to the Galatians, Paul argues for “faith in Jesus Christ” as the sole avenue to “justification.” (Gal. 2:16). If on is saved (justified) soley by faith in jesus , then deeds do not matter, and that partly underpins my (Nike Commercial) statement that “The central declaration of Christianity seems to be “Just do it – It’s all good.”
    When a Muslim sins, it is clear that he is acting outside the bounds of Islam, or against its teachings. There is no question, confusion or ambiguity about that. Good deeds matter, righteous living matters, obedience to the law and commandments of God matters. Submission of ones will to the will of God matters. All of which, in the end analysis, are not really so an inferior Christian theology.
    Your argument that Catholicism does not teach Sola Fide, while Protestant churches do, only confirms that there is much confusion and disagreement even among Christians on what Christianity actually teaches on these type of issues.
    In contrast, Islam is very clear and straightforward.

    :::::::::::

    Alan,
    I won’t call you a liar as you did to me, but let’s be honest, for all the lip service that Christians may give to the contrary, we both know that Christianity does not require the law, and that Paul rejected it, hence the name of Paul’s Gospel, is the “Gospel of Freedom/Liberty” (from the law). To try to downplay this fact by blaming Martin Luther for all the confusion, is kind of disingenuous, given that Paul himself writes rejected the law. Also, trying to deflect by saying that Protestantism is a minority, (as if no one really believes in Sola Fide) is ridiculous, since Protestantism is a “minority” that comprises almost half of Christianity. So their teachings are very influential in the world of Christianity as you well know. I can appreciate differences between the Protestant perspective and Catholic perspective but such differences only serve to highlight the confused ambiguity that is at the heart of Christianity.

    So what if Paul did not write of filthy rags? He trashes good works in many other ways. Paul writes that ‘By the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin’ (Rom 3:20). He also says “There is no one who is righteous, not even one; (Rom. 3:10) So clearly Paul does not consider the law to be necessary requirement for salvation, it is simply there to serve as a type of mirror to look at so that we may know that we are all sinners. Contrary to the verse you quoted (Rom. 3:31), Paul explains that the law is a burden, bondage, and even a curse! He does all of this for no other reason than to try and explain to as to why the vicarious atonement of Jesus is required. Likewise, the sins noted in Galatians 5:19-21 are simply there to remind that the recipients of that epistle that they are all sinners, not to stipulate that these sins must not be committed or salvation is lost, since in the end (according to Paul) salvation only comes through a faith based redemptive belief in the cross. Paul plays with the word “law” and argues that justification is by the “law” of faith, so when he talks of upholding the law, he is really speaking of upholding the “law” of faith (Romans 3:27-31). The headings of those periscopes in many Christian Bibles is “none is Righteous” and then “Righteousness through faith.” So your argument that Paul upholds the law is really weak and full of holes.

    The problem here is that Christians have an entirely different understanding of the meaning of “Righteousness.” Christians believe that no man can be righteous whatsoever at all, and they are forced to believe and say this, otherwise, why do we need Jesus? On the other hand Jews and Muslims both believe that any person can attain a pious state, and be a righteous person, even if the person falls and makes a mistake or sin, it is a true believing righteous person who gets back up and returns to the right path. Righteousness is having faith in God while ALSO striving to be an obedient servant of God, following his divine law and commandments, and this is something that is attainable.

    Is there some Good advice in the Bible? Sure. Are there moralistic teachings in the Bible? Yes agreed. However, the Christian faith does not regard adherence to such moral advice as being a necessary guidance in one’s daily practice of the religion, nor is it required for salvation. The Christian is “Free” to be a morally good person……..or not! Either way they are saved by a faith belief that Jesus died on the cross for their sins.
    A hollow faith in the Atonement by the Cross does not necessarily result in good works or spiritual growth for the self or society, because faith based redemption ultimately does not require any action.

    Given this, the question should be asked: Of what use or benefit is Christianity for the betterment mankind, on an individual spiritual level and societally? If Christianity as a faith tradition, leads to such sinful immorality and it does not really offer anything (including salvation) that cannot be obtained elsewhere in more rational based religious traditions.

    My original point alluded to the fact that there is no legalistic spiritual guidance in Christianity to guide the believer as to the proper practice, conduct, or behavior, and to guard against religious innovation, deviations and especially misguidance into sin. That point still stands.

    :::::::::::

    Like

  35. bard ehrman DOUBLE booms on ken temple :

    I think we can all agree that most people read the Bible for religious reasons, pure and simple. They think that in *some* sense it is the word of God, and that it provides the guidance they need for what to believe and how to live. But what if there are *different* and even *irreconcilable* differences from one biblical author to another on precisely these issues? Which part do you follow? For then it is not a simple matter of reading any part of the Bible and saying, “OK, that settles it! That’s what I should believe. Or that is how I should behave/conduct myself.” Because if another part of the Bible says something else, then … then you’re still stuck: what should you believe or how should you behave?

    Even fundamentalists are confronted with this problem, and they have to come up with theological explanations about how the Bible can contain the very words of God, the directions he has given to his people, word-for-word, if the words in one part are at odds with words in another part.

    On the most obvious level, most …

    To read the rest of this post you will need to belong to the Blog. If you don’t belong, you’re missing out on a lot. Joining costs about two bucks a month. That’s much less than a Big Mac and it’s much healthier. And every buck goes to charity. So why not join?

    On the most obvious level, most fundamentalists do not keep kosher. It’s OK to eat ham and shrimp cocktail for example. But the Bible is quite explicit: God’s people are not supposed to do that. And so fundamentalists say that that is because God changed the rules partway through. The kosher food laws are for Jews before Jesus came. Not for Christians afterward.

    So then in what sense is the Bible actually authoritative for Christians? Apparently only *part* of the Bible is. Then why read the other part, and why even bother having it? To see how crazy those uninformed Jews are? (I know that sounds crass: but it’s what a lot of fundamentalist Christians actually think. I know that because I used to be one of them!)

    This can be seen even more clearly in the common claim that Christians don’t need to keep the laws of the Old Testament, except the commandment to love God with all your heart, soul, and strength, the commandment to love your neighbor as yourself, and the Decalogue. Hey, I don’t keep the Jewish law, just the Ten Commandments.

    Really? The vast majority of Christians don’t think you should even have to follow the Ten Commandments. Just nine of them. How many Christians do you know who completely abstain from work on Saturday? Oh, well, Sabbath observance was only for Jews, and look, I do go to church on Sunday. Isn’t that the same thing?

    No, it’s not the same thing. The law requires you not to work on the seventh day, not go to church on the first. OK, then, I keep the Nine Commandments.

    But even more than that, if the Bible is the unimpeachable guide about how to behave and what to believe, what do you do when different parts are different? In many places in the Old Testament it presupposes that there are many gods, not just One God. When the Ten Commandments instruct the ancient Hebrew to “have no other gods before me,” the very assumption is that there are indeed other gods, but none of them is to have priority over Yahweh. So is it OK for Christians to believe there are many gods who can be worshiped, so long as none of them is placed higher than the Christian god? Of course not.

    If the Gospel of Mark suggests that Jesus was a full flesh-and-blood-born-of-a-woman-human who at some point of his life was made the son of God (his baptism) – can Christians believe that? Of course not, not today. If John’s Gospel is the only Gospel where Jesus explicitly declares that he is God on earth, why should Christians accept that view versus the one found in the earlier Gospels? If the book of Revelation indicates that eternal life will come only when God brings history to a crashing halt with a series of unfathomable disasters and catastrophes on earth, followed by a Final Battle and the descent of a new Jerusalem from heaven, but the Gospel of John indicates that eternal life is here and now, given to anyone who believes in Jesus, that no future catastrophic end of the world is needed – which are you supposed to believe?

    And what about ethics? If the Bible reveals how God wants people to behave, should we take it seriously when God tells his people that they are not to have any contact with people of other religions, so that if there are any false worshipers in their vicinity, they are supposed to murder them – every man, woman, and child who doesn’t worship Yahweh? Is that how Christians should behave? Should we kill everyone who has different religious views? You might say that I’m just being ridiculous here. But why should we think that the commandment to love the neighbor applies but the commandment to kill the religious enemy is not?

    And if the command to love the neighbor really meant that you are to love your fellow Israelite but kill all the Canaanites (which, in fact, it did mean), then does that mean we should just love Jews? Or just Americans?

    If you say that Jesus changed all that, then again, why not just ditch the Old Testament? And if you want to ditch the Old Testament, if, in fact, you want to mock its laws (given by God!) and those who keep them (those backward Jews), how are you not in fact claiming that the Jewish religion and the Jews who keep it are unenlightened at best and perverse at worse? How are you not engaged in anti-semitic thinking?

    But even apart from that, if you’re going to start ditching things, do you ditch 1 Timothy that says that women are not allowed to say a word in church, or Galatians which says men and women are equal in Christ? Which one? And why? Do you ditch Jesus’ insistence that you love your father and mother or his insistence that you hate them (Luke 14:26)? Do you ditch the insistence that you resist the ruling authorities at all costs because they are completely opposed to God (the book of Revelation) or the insistence that you obey the ruling authorities because they are God’s ministers (Romans 13)? Do you ditch Jesus’ claim that you need to keep every word of the Law in order to enter the kingdom (Matthew 5:17-20) or Paul’s claim that Christians do not need to keep the law? And on and on and on.

    And so the problem is not simply THAT there are contradictions. The problem is that contradictions make you need to choose what to believe and how to behave. And if you’re the one doing the choosing, then in what sense is the text itself authoritative? Aren’t you the one exercising authority by deciding what parts to keep and what parts either to get rid of or reinterpret so that you can tell yourself there isn’t a problem? So who is the ultimate authority? If it’s you, why claim it’s the text?

    The contradictions matter for lots of other things as well, as we’ll see in the next couple of posts on the matter.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ehrman gave not 1 contradiction.
      Apparently he never studied how the NT fulfilled the OT.

      Like

      • @ Ken

        Oh don’t worry this gentleman will:

        Liked by 2 people

      • No real contradictions there either.

        Like

      • Of course, the reality is that there are contradictions. We don’t pay any mind to village idiots mindlessly repeating church propaganda.

        Liked by 1 person

      • You still don’t know how to obey your own religion. Qur’an, Surah 29:46

        Liked by 1 person

      • Those are all surface level, out of context, lack of study apparent contradictions, but they are not real contradictions.

        Many good books and resources explain those passages and how they reasonably harmonize with one another.

        There are textual variants and copyist errors among some of the numbers of things in the OT between the books of Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles. But once one studies all the data, it is easy to see that a scribe accidently added a zero, etc. and those are also reasonably explainable.

        Some things that those atheists make the cartoon characters say can be used against Islam also.

        For example, using the word “tempt” in Genesis 22:1 for “text”. God tested Abraham, yes. We and Islam agree on that principle. But it was a temptation to sin, as James 1:13-14 makes clear. God tests, but never tempts to sin.

        Other mocking by the atheist cartoon about heaven and hell and eternal life can also be turned against Islam, so there.

        It was clever and cutsy without being mean and cursing (like the usual way internet atheists do), but the underlying mocking over the idea that God exists, judges sin, send prophets and inspires books, creation, right and wrong, morality, heaven and hell, was obvious.

        So, it is really inconsistent with Islam for Muslims to use this kind of rhetoric in its Da’wa.

        Like

      • Lol, look at the clown again showing his hypocrisy! He whining about Muslims using atheist cartoons that mock his Bible but doesn’t hesitate to use to use the likes of David Wood, who mocks Islam and Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). This vile, whining clown just doesn’t get it. 😂

        Like

      • The books of Samuel and Chronicles have much more than just simple “scribal errors”. There was an obvious attempt by the Chronicler to edit the version in Samuel. For example, he completely cut out the Bathsheba affair. This was not just an innocent mistake.

        Like

      • No, because the author knows that those books existed and no one could get rid of them. Chronicles was written for the new generation that returned from the exile, with a renewed emphasis on the positive events of the glories of the Davidic and Solomonic kingdom, without denying that that the Bathsheba affair took place. Not mentioning something does mean denial or trying to cover it up or delete it from the records.

        Like

      • 1 Chronicles 29:29 proves this; because it says, “the rest of the acts of David, from first to last, are written in the chronicles (historical narratives, record) of Samuel the seer (another word for “prophet), and in the chronicles of Nathan the prophet, and in the chronicles of Gad the seer.”

        So the book of Chronicles is not trying to hide the books of Samuel or Kings.

        So your argument is nuked.

        Like

      • Now let’s watch as this clown tries to excuse his hypocrisy. It’s a mystery as to why he still can’t figure out why he is deservedly mocked as a clown. 🤔

        Like

      • How is sincere faith in the Bible and truth of Christianity hypocrisy?

        You just constantly expose how you have no power of respect nor of obeying your own Adab ادب (manners) commanded on you in your religion.

        Like

      • 😂😂😂 See everyone? He’s talking about “manners”, and yet uses someone like Wood, who shows no manners when mocking Islam! Kennywise is such a predictable little clown. 🤣🤣🤣

        Liked by 1 person

      • Some of Wood’s material I don’t agree with. As with Shamoun’s bad behavior. When they stick to facts and texts and principles, they are good; but the recent “boom boom room” is bad and some of the “Islamicize me” stuff was in bad taste.

        Like

      • You are the one who deflects away from your own bad behavior and Adab. ادب

        Like

      • Typo:

        For example, using the word “tempt” in Genesis 22:1 for “test”.

        Like

      • But it was NOT a temptation to sin, as James 1:13-14 makes clear. God tests, but never tempts to sin.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        I really debated about liking your comment for its sheer boldness of acting no one here saw the video before.

        Like

      • A lot of it’s mocking of the existence of God and God’s ability to inspire prophets and books, and mocking of sin, and God’s judgment and heaven and hell and judgment day, is also against Islam; so inconsistent for you to use.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        “As with Shamoun’s bad behavior. When they stick to facts and texts and principles, they are good”

        You talking about that same dude who got creamed on this blog and hasn’t shown his face around here except to basically be a comic book villain talking about how he’ll soon get QB and how his reply is “incoming”?

        And really you got all that from the video? I just saw mockery of the various contradictions the “inspired” authors made. Funny how perspective works…

        Liked by 1 person

      • Wood makes some good points here recently.

        Like

      • At the end of the video, it mocked the idea of judgement day, God, and God’s promise of eternal life, and the concept of guilt over sins.

        Like

      • The end of the atheist apparent contradiction’s video
        The game show contest of Craig versus Ken cartoons

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Wood’s argument is retarded and you’re more retarded for thinking it was good:

        1. Making a mistake is not breaking a promise. No one claims Muhammad(saw) is anything but a human.

        2. You literally believe a prophet (David (as)) committed adultery and murder. As I said before (which nobody has even tried to counter) even if half the crap you guys say about Islam was true, bad character wouldn’t be a disqualifier for prophethood as pretty much EVERY prophet in the Biblical text is a POS.

        3. He has committed a fallacy of false equivocation

        4. Now for giggles let’s turn this around. Jesus(as) broke his promise in the gospels as I note in my article:

        “Luke says that Jesus (peace be upon him) made a promise to the robber who was crucified with him:

        “Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”[6]

        This was during the crucifixion. However, in John, Jesus says to the disciples after the resurrection:

        “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”[7]

        Where is the Father? He is in heaven according to Matthew.[8] What was the promise that Jesus made to the robber again? He would see Jesus in heaven the same day (i.e. on that Friday, the day of the crucifixion). Yet John says that Jesus (peace be upon him) did not yet ascend to the Father (in heaven) on Sunday.[9]”

        As I said, this crap only appeals to other stupid people who have never heard of Islam. Go ahead and send this to these coals of Hell in the comment section for me, thanks.

        Liked by 2 people

      • You quickly turned away for the Hadith and Qur’an details that David Wood demonstrated his argument, you deflected to turn to your false claim against Jesus and the gospels.

        “today” shows that after Jesus died, His body was in the tomb, but the Divine Nature was in heaven/ paradise and everywhere is in His presence, and the thief who repented went to paradise.

        Then later, Jesus’ Spirit / divine nature reunited with His body in the tomb and rose from the dead.

        Therefore there is no contradiction.

        Like

      • Ken Temple, that’s exactly what we have been talking with you about for the past couple days!
        Indeed you’re a hypocrite! You even appeal to this rabid dog, David Wood?! Oh God! How sad that is!
        David Wood quotes Islamic sources without knowledge! He’s a deceiving man & liar!
        The target audience for him is the lay christians who don\’t have knowledge in their bible, let alone about Islam. His audience are not interested in the truth!
        That clown frames the hadiths with his ignorant & biased approach.That’s it!

        Just listen to the first 2 minutes of his stupid video, and look how he deceptively framed that hadith!
        To break down down for you, Ken.
        Who said that angels are”afraid from dogs?
        How does that hadith indicate that Gabriel didn’t keep his promise when you read the narration as whole?

        Islam’s greatest enemy is logic
        What an irony when it comes from a christian’s mouth. 🙂
        May Allah عزوجل deal with that man by His justice.

        By the way, I think brother Faiz is very skillful exposing your hypocrisy! He makes a lot of good points. 🙂

        Liked by 3 people

      • He quoted from several Hadith and the Qur’an and the logic and reason made sense.

        Like

      • No, hadiths got framed by his deceptive & filthy approach. That’s it. You didn’t answer my questions, which means you know that the answer would expose that filthy man. If you had applied common sense and logic on your illogic religion (i.e. godman), you would’ve left this religion years ago! Be humble, Ken! The truth has come to you! Submit before it’s too late.

        Liked by 4 people

      • @ Ken

        He misquoted some hadith from context and gave his poor logic. After showing his fallacy I then turned it around and you attempted to counter it poorly, by thinking the false doctrine of Jesus having two natures solves the issue. Either he was in heaven after his death or he hasn’t gone to God.

        And I have to agree with Abdullah about logic being our “greatest enemy” when you just twisted a clear text. Also weren’t you all the ones oppressing each other because of it (like Arius who was right btw). Abdullah hit the nail on the head his crap is mainly for Christians who don’t even know anything about their religion let alone others

        Moving on, as I said before this whole “oh whoa is us how you speak” blah, blah, blah is just false piety. What you all want to do is insult our religion without anything coming back. You guys can give it out but can’t take it.

        Liked by 2 people

  36. Mark 7:19 is clear on the food laws.

    Like

    • “Mark 7:19 is clear on the food laws.”

      its hyperbole . its not meant to be taken literally.

      the context is about HAND washing

      jesus never said that PORK is clean and should be consumed .

      he is not saying that pork is clean, he is saying that eating FOOD WITH DEFILED hands does not make the food DEFILED.

      when jeeezer said this, he COULD NOT have swine in mind, because in that time , WESTERN christianity did not exist.

      Like

    • jesus said all physical foods are clean meaning LITERAL

      but when he says take out your eyes , hyperbole LOL

      if peter heard jesus, he would have “hyperboled” jesus’ words, ken temple loves bacon so his gentile love for swine must trump jesus’ hyperbole.

      Like

    • “all”does not mean “all” in jewish context.

      plus “he declared all foods clean” means that the food which is even held with shitty hands is clean so no need to WASH hands.

      Like

  37. Kennywise the clown is whining again. I know, Kennywise. You’re sad at seeing your religion lose. But a sad clown is still funny! 😉

    “Yes Jesus physically cursed the fig tree as a symbol of the cursing that is coming up on Israel because of their lack of fruit and their sins because of the hypocrisy and sins God also destroyed the temple which Jesus predicted the cursing of the fig tree is parallel to the cleansing of the temple if you study the passage you might could see this . If you keep reading the passage both and Mark 11 and in Matthew 21 you will see that is about the lack of fruit is real and they were rejection of the Messiah and the prediction of the temple which will be destroyed in 70 A.D. .”

    Blah, blah, blah. He STILL PHYSICALLY killed the fig tree, and then he said that the disciples could do GREATER miracles. I know you’re embarrassed at the false promises made by your savior, but lying about it will not save your religion.

    REST IN PEACE, Christianity.

    Like

  38. “I wish you peace.”

    I want to wish some peace too. Ahem…Rest in peace Christianity. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

    Like

  39. “This vile clown is making excuses for the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children by his evil government’s sanctions. We shouldn’t be surprised though. Remember that this evil clown makes the same excuses for his pagan god’s genocidal commands in the Bible. These are the evil and rotten fruits of Christianity.

    The Iraq wars was supported by the Evangelical Christian. There are even cases of American pilots putting graffiti on their bombs inspired by the Bible, such as “Babylon has fallen! And so has this (the bomb).” These evil pagans saw these wars as new crusades, a chance to avenge the humiliation of Christians at the hands of Muslims during the Crusades.”

    don’t you hate it when a crosstian white boy living on the land of indians tells you about “evil hearts” ?

    Like


  40. We Protestants are not Roman Catholic and we reject Transubstantiation as wrong, heretical, and even blasphemous, since they have to genuflect before the bread and wine after the priest says the “holy words” that supposedly change bread and wine into Jesus’ flesh and blood.

    Total superstition and unBiblical.”

    these rituals come from the jewish apostles. remember, blood magic is ancient and pagan and according to john jesus believed that bread really becomes the flesh of jesus. the catholics have a point.

    Like

  41. @ Ken

    “Why does Faiz and Mr. HeathCliff mainly spew out insults and hatred and ad hominem methods and dirty talk?”

    Probably because you insult and lie on our religion/way of life and indirectly incite others to fight us. But that’s just a guess.

    “But where does sin come from? how does it start in the soul, the thoughts the mind, and then proceeds out in the actions?”

    I’m having a hard time understanding the question, are you talking about its origin and how it manifests?

    Like

    • “Why does Faiz and Mr. HeathCliff mainly spew out insults and hatred and ad hominem methods and dirty talk?”

      ken, i don’t think brother faiz has ever spewed insult, hatred or even talked dirty towards you.

      i ask you about why yhwh wore balls to experience them in his person because it makes no sense to me. thats like a male wearing fake breasts.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Yes, both of you guys do and really ruin respectable debate here.

        using phrases like “yhwh wore balls” is so crass and ugly and also, as in much Islamic thinking, thinking that physical things that God created are unholy or somehow “ikki” (eww, gross, etc.)

        Liked by 1 person

      • so if anyone other than jesus went toilet or was male human and said “i am yhwh,” you will not use reason to demonstrate why such being is lying?

        when people used to worship cows in hebrew bible , why did people identify the cow as a grass eating one?

        since kafir like you has your heart steeped in paganism, it is no suprise you believe that your god has testicles, went to toilet and came out of vagina as fully god and fully man

        after all, you believe that x has ALL the attributes of being human

        Like

      • After all, you believe x has FULL experience being human being and x according to u is “fully divine person” so by simple logic “fully divien person ” has FULL experieice being human. Kufr after kufr

        Like

  42. Islam speaks of “good manners” ادب – Adab – proper manners, being civilized. Both Faiz and Mr.heathcliff and sometimes Stewjo004 don’t seem to obey Islam in that.

    Liked by 1 person

    • @ Ken

      Because you keep putting my name in your mouth allow me to explain with big letters because you can’t seem to read ahem

      THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE OPENLY HOSTILE TOWARDS ISLAM

      So you, Iggy, Shamoun etc are all in the same boat and will continue to be until otherwise noted because you are liars. Thank you and have a nice day.

      Liked by 2 people

      • sincere disagreement with it is not open hostility. If NT is true, then Islam is false. full stop. That is not open hostility. It is a false religion that came 600 years too late – one man’s subjective claim in a cave, that developed over 22 years – 610 – 632 AD; and was from 622 onward (Hegira) the promotion of aggressive warfare against Byzantine and Persia; obviously a false religion.

        Believing that NT is true and final revelation sincerely, and therefore Islam is false, is logic and reason and honesty, not open hostility.

        Like

      • You don’t seem to know the definition of lying and a liar, etc.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Exactly Stew. Hypocritical clowns who spread lies about other religions and then refuse to admit when they are wrong deserve no sympathy. The Quran tells Muslims to be firm against the unbelievers who attack Islam (though that verse was in the context of physical aggression). Rats like Kennywise whine when they are put in their place with intellectual arguments.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Christianity: a false religion largely based on the subjective opinions of a false apostle who never met Jesus and yet gave himself the authority to teach about him.

        Christianity: a false religion which came hundreds of years after Judaism and contradicted almost everything about God (not a trinity), the Messiah (not a mangod), the Mosaic law (not abrogated), etc.

        Christianity: a false religion supported by anonymous documents with competing theologies, and that also based their material on apocryphal sources.

        Result: Christianity gets nuked. REST IN PEACE Christianity.

        Liked by 2 people

    • @ Ken

      It is not “disagreement” to continue to propagate a lie after being refuted (ex. “Dhimmitude”, Al Jabbar, Islam is external rituals, misquotes of what people say and a variety of other issues) What you’re attempting to do is to keep “shotgunning” into the comment section the same thing over and over again hoping to catch somebody who doesn’t know any better. The fact that you criticize Islam for something you know is in your text is enough to show your intellectual dishonesty. If you need another example of your lying nature we can do a case study if my article I made in response to a claim of yours:

      https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2019/02/24/corruption-of-the-scriptures-part-i-does-islam-confirm-the-bible-as-a-scripture-from-god/

      I have thoroughly explained each claimed verse in its context, the reason for revelation and even went as far as translating scholarly works that have never been translated into English before and what did you do?

      https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2019/06/02/muslim-argument-defeated/

      You repeated the same crap I just refuted to your audience that doesn’t know any better and claimed to “destroy” me without even addressing a SINGLE point. You’re a liar man plain and simple. And if you claim to not be “shotgunning” you’re mindlessly repeating other liars and the Prophet (saw) said:

      ‘It is enough of a lie for a man that he narrates everything he hears’.

      https://sunnah.com/muslim/introduction/10

      Liked by 2 people

      • The lying rat will post his repetitive crap on his pathetic blog, but will hide any response to his rubbish, and then will also block comments on his blog.

        Liked by 1 person

      • ” If you need another example of your lying nature we can do a case study if my article I made in response to a claim of yours”

        the cure for him is to cut it out and replace it with an electrical one

        Like

      • Since I wrote from the beginning about the Pact of Omar being developed later, based on Omar, and done by other Muslim Caliphs and Jurists, I was not inaccurate.

        Al Jabbar and Kheir Ol Makkareen – still is true. No one explains the distinction between how Allah is sovereign and allows sin.

        Islam is MAINLY rituals and external laws, with some mention of eternal sins in the heart, but it is not an EMPHASIS. The Emphasis in Islam is on first conquering an area and establishing Sharia law and subjugating everyone. Dhimmitude is true in Islamic history – based on the Jiziye tax in Surah 9:29. You did not refute that nor Ibn Kathir’s commentary on Surah 9:28 – 29 – “if you fear poverty”, etc. “for this reason, Muhammad commanded the Jihads against the peoples of the book (especially Byzantine Empire). The Majoosian were included in the people of the book a little later, but originally, Islamic history saw them as “fire worshippers” and not Monotheistic.

        You did not refute anything. Therefore opinion and difference of opinion is not lying.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        “based on Omar, and done by other Muslim Caliphs and Jurists, I was not inaccurate.”

        Yes, you were it is a scholarly CONSENSUS it is based on Emperor Justinian and was forged by the “Mad Caliph” of the Fatimid dynasty. Next, nobody enforced it. There is that deception again.

        “No one explains the distinction between how Allah is sovereign and allows sin.”

        That’s because no one understands your Greek philosophy mumbo jumbo. Ask it like a normal person and it will be explained as such.,

        “Islam is MAINLY rituals and external laws, with some mention of eternal sins in the heart, but it is not an EMPHASIS.”

        Dude I had to have listed AT LEAST 25 refrences (and made sure they weren’t common so that other Muslims could read it.) How are you going to argue witha na adherent about what the main thing taught is? Most Muslims couldn’t even tell you what the diffrence between Shariah and fiqh is. So how is thei an EMPHASIS on the external? The first thing emphasized is allowing FAITH to enter the person’s heart and then you add things little by little. I know this because:

        A. I teach New Muslim classes
        B. This is what the Prophet(saw) did
        Narrated Ibn `Abbas:

        The Prophet (ﷺ) sent Mu`adh to Yemen and said, “Invite the people to testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and I am Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ), and if they obey you to do so, then teach them that Allah has enjoined on them five prayers in every day and night (in twenty-four hours), and if they obey you to do so, then teach them that Allah has made it obligatory for them to pay the Zakat from their property and it is to be taken from the wealthy among them and given to the poor.”

        https://sunnah.com/bukhari/24/1

        Notice he told Muadh to invite them to faith. Once they get their teach them prayer so that they connect with God and so on and so forth. This is also why you don’t overwhelm New Muslims even if something is right:

        ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported:

        I asked Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) about the wall, circumpassing the House (i. e. whether the wall on the side of Hijr was included in the Ka’ba). He said, Yes. I said: Then why did they not include it in the House? He said: ‘Your people ran short of the means (to do so). I said: Why is it that the level of its door is raised high? He said: Your people did it so that they should admit one whom they liked, and forbid him whom they disliked, and if your people were not new converts to faith, and I did not apprehend that their hearts would feel agitated at this. I would have definitely included (the area of) this wall-in the House and would have brought the door to the level of the ground.

        Notice he(saw) did not make the KAABA (aka the focal point of our prayer correct) because it would be too much.

        C. This is the EXACT reason why the Quran took 23 years to be complete as itself says:

        25:32. The disbelievers say: “Well why was the Qur’an not ‘sent down’ to him all at once?” I sent it in this manner to strengthen your heart which is already overwhelmed with emotions; and revealed it gradually, annunciating every letter.
        25:33. They cannot bring any argument to you without Me revealing to you the Truth and the best explanation.

        “Dhimmitude is true in Islamic history”

        Yes, non-Muslim citizens have existed throughout Islam’s history and in some areas at various times were done unjustly (and is worthy of condemnation) Who argued against that? You are saying it has ALWAYS been the case and that is a lie.

        ” – based on the Jiziye tax in Surah 9:29. You did not refute that nor Ibn Kathir’s commentary on Surah 9:28 – 29 – “if you fear poverty”, etc. “for this reason, Muhammad commanded the Jihads against the peoples of the book (especially Byzantine Empire). The Majoosian were included in the people of the book a little later, but originally, Islamic history saw them as “fire worshippers” and not Monotheistic.”

        Well, the easy reason for that as that was not a verse discussed by me. Several points:

        A. We still think their Fire worshippers like how you are a Cross worshipper.
        B. As for ayah, 9:28 has NOTHING to even do with the Jews and Christians genius. The verse you are quoting is:

        9:28. Believers, those who equate others with God are filthy, so do not let them come near Masjid Al Haram after this year. If you are afraid of an economic collapse, God will make you rich from His blessings if He desires because God is All Knowing and the One to pass Judgment.

        First common sense are you going near Masjid Al Haram? This verse is because the pagans were being barred from the Hajj pilgrimage. The economic collapse was emphasized because the city of Mecca lies in the middle of nowhere and depends on the Hajj for trade so by stopping them there was fear that the city would not be able to sustain itself.

        As for 9:29:

        9:29. Fight those from the People of the Scripture who don’t believe in God and the Last Day, and who don’t forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, nor live by the religion of Truth until they pay the protection tax with their own hands, feeling humbled.

        A. If memory serves me this wasn’t even for the Romans this was due to one of their vassal states the Ghassinids who killed a messenger. Muslims had a skirmish at Mutah and loss because they weren’t expecting reinforcements from Romans and the surrounding auxiliary units. So now they were coming for a second round. This entirety of Chapter 9 is about this rematch and preventing the pagans from Hajj.

        B. Ignoring this context (which explains what Ibn Kathir said) if you’re talking about “feeling humbled” part both Ibn Qayyum(rh) and Imam Nawwawi refuted this position:

        “This is groundless and the verse doesn’t imply that. It is not related that the Prophet or the companions acted like that. The correct opinion regarding this verse is that the word “saghâr” means “acceptance” by non-Muslims of the structure of the Muslim right and their payment of Jizya.” (Ahkam Ahlul Dhimma, Volume 1, p. 23-24).

        “As for this aforementioned practice I know of no sound support for it in this respect, and it is only mentioned by the scholars of Khurasan. The majority of scholars say that the Jizyah is to be taken with gentleness, as one would receive a debt. The reliably correct opinion is that this practice is invalid and those who devised it should be refuted. It is not related that the Prophet or any of the rightly-guided caliphs did any such thing when collecting the Jizyah. Al-Raafi’i said in the first part of his book on Jizyah that the more correct opinions amongst our companions is that “sighaar” means to abide by the rulings of Islam and to have them imposed on you. They said that the most severe form of sighaar that could occur is having something that they don’t agree with imposed on them.” (Rawdat al-Talibin, Volume 10, p.315-16)

        But even if that wasn’t the case so what? Persia and Rome were both evil nations (as your own text will attest to) and God established His kingdom through their fall. Be mad at the Prophet Daniel, not us.

        Liked by 1 person

  43. “1 Chronicles 29:29 proves this; because it says, “the rest of the acts of David, from first to last, are written in the chronicles (historical narratives, record) of Samuel the seer (another word for “prophet), and in the chronicles of Nathan the prophet, and in the chronicles of Gad the seer.”

    So the book of Chronicles is not trying to hide the books of Samuel or Kings.

    So your argument is nuked.”

    LOL, Kennywise! Is this the best you could do?

    First of all, just because the author mentioned Samuel, does not mean he was talking about the version of Samuel you know. For all you know, Samuel could have been redacted later.

    Second, the Chronicler mentions other sources which no longer exist. Therefore, he was basing his version of events on several sources. What if the lost versions of Nathan and Gad also did not have the story of the affair? We can’t determine this either way. All we have is the word of Samuel and the word of the Chronicler. They are at odds, because the later omitted the story of the affair.

    Third, it’s not just the affair that the Chronicler omitted. He basically omitted any story that made David look back. That is NOT a coincidence. Marc Zvi Brettler observes that the Chronicler omitted many of the more sordid and embarrassing parts of David’s story. He states:

    “Chronicles similarly omits the unflattering set of events that happened next in Samuel: the rape of David’s daughter Tamar by Amnon, her half-brother; the murder of Amnon by his half-brother Absalom; and the (largely successful) rebellion by Absalom, followed by his death. These events suggest a measure-for-measure punishment of David and his house. They reflect badly on David, so the Chronicler omitted them (perhaps with the hope that his book would displace Samuel as an authoritative version of history).”[65]

    Similarly, John C. Endres states:

    “The stories the Chronicler omitted include many incidents in which David’s loyalty and character seem compromised, where he appears weakened by sin that affects him and most of his household negatively. […] The Chronicler omits much of the negative portrayal of David (“whitewash”), perhaps to make him appear more religious and saintly.”[66]

    These seemingly deliberate omissions have led some scholars to believe that the story of the adulterous affair was inserted by a later redactor.[67]

    Steven McKenzie observes regarding Samuel:

    “…the story of Joab’s siege of Rabbah continues in 12:26, so that 11:1 + 12:26-31 seems to have been an independent narrative into which the Bathsheba episode (11:2-12:25) was inserted. David’s remaining in Jerusalem was part of the originally independent story of the conquest of Rabbah, but a later editor made use of it as the setting for the Bathsheba story” (p. 157).

    So, as usual, Kennywise is the one that gets nuked.

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwibl9DWoePlAhWHiOAKHfmwASUQjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fgiphy.com%2Fexplore%2Fnuke&psig=AOvVaw2wXJ5BzyOrEOZYKsBRm1ba&ust=1573599650447871

    Liked by 3 people

    • Pure speculation to say that verse is not talking about Samuel (that is today 1 & 2 Samuel).

      You are arguing from silent possibility rather than evidence or fact.

      Like

      • Moron, I didn’t say he wasn’t talking about 1 and 2 Samuel. I said he may not have been talking about the Samuel you know. Your Biblical books were redacted. This is a fact, which no amount of clownish gymnastics will refute.

        Why would the Chronicler have mentioned Samuel and yet omit parts of the Samuel narrative? Obviously, even if the Samuel narrative has always stayed the way it is (which is unlikely), the Chronicler made changes as he saw fit. Therefore, to him, mentioning Samuel was not necessarily an endorsement of everything in it.

        Like

      • 1 and 2 Samuel is obviously what he meant – the original Hebrew book was one book.

        Like

      • Non-sequitur stupid. But even if he did, it makes no difference as he changed the parts of the Samuel narrative as he saw fit. So telling his readers about Samuel did not mean he considered it completely accurate. He just used it as one of his sources.

        Like

      • He did not change anything, not including other things, and summarizing, and pointing back to the rest of the information is not changing or redacting.

        Like

      • Your broken record preaching won’t persuade people of reason. Just because you are a gullible idiot, doesn’t mean the rest of us are. Of course the Chronicler changed things. The biggest change was omitting anything that made David look bad.

        Liked by 1 person

  44. “Some of Wood’s material I don’t agree with. As with Shamoun’s bad behavior. When they stick to facts and texts and principles, they are good; but the recent “boom boom room” is bad and some of the “Islamicize me” stuff was in bad taste.”

    You keep exposing your idiocy and hypocrisy! LOL!!

    So you have no qualms against using the likes of Wood and Shamoun, even though they use mockery. So then you should not whine about Muslims using a video by an atheist who mocks your Bible, especially since the video makes some good points using humor. So stop whining dummy. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

    • @ QB

      Oh, he shows his hypocrisy by supporting some kuffar inspiring other kuffar to harm Muslims. (Yes this sh*t does get shown to LE, Military and Intelligence agencies) So pardon me that we don’t find it cute and by exposing your retardation of not being able to read basic queen’s English hurt your feelings.

      Liked by 1 person

  45. “using phrases like “yhwh wore balls” is so crass and ugly and also, as in much Islamic thinking, thinking that physical things that God created are unholy or somehow “ikki” (eww, gross, etc.)”

    LOL, I think you’re confusing Islam with your pagan Christianity. It’s your religion, especially Paul the false apostle, that spoke against normal things like sex. He was so convinced the end was near that he advised people to forget about marriage and sex and think about preparing for the end.

    God’s creation is wonderful. The problem is that you turn the Creator into the created by giving him human characteristics, like idol worshipers. So yeah, we have a problem with that pagan nonsense. Heath asked a logical question about your god having testes. You believe that he did. That’s just what you believe. It’s stupid, of course. But that’s what Christianity is: a stupid, pagan religion which worships a mangod. You are no different that Hindus who worship Krishna or Sai Baba. Their gods also had penises and testes. It’s unbelievable!

    Liked by 2 people

    • “The problem is that you turn the Creator into the created by giving him human characteristics, like idol worshipers. So yeah, we have a problem with that pagan nonsense. Heath asked a logical question about your god having testes. You believe that he did. That’s just what you believe. It’s stupid, of course. But that’s what Christianity is: a stupid, pagan religion which worships a mangod. You are no different that Hindus who worship Krishna or Sai Baba. Their gods also had penises and testes. It’s unbelievable!”

      [5:72] Pagans indeed are those who say that GOD is the Messiah, son of Mary. The Messiah himself said, “O Children of Israel, you shall worship GOD; my Lord* and your Lord.” Anyone who sets up any idol beside GOD, GOD has forbidden Paradise for him, and his destiny is Hell. The wicked have no helpers.

      [6:100] Yet, they set up beside GOD idols from among the jinns, though He is the One who created them. They even attribute to Him sons and daughters, without any knowledge. Be He glorified. He is the Most High, far above their claims.

      [7:194] The idols you invoke besides GOD are creatures like you. Go ahead and call upon them; let them respond to you, if you are right.

      [10:18] They worship beside GOD idols that possess no power to harm them or benefit them, and they say, “These are our intercessors at GOD!” Say, “Are you informing GOD of something He does not know in the heavens or the earth?” Be He glorified. He is the Most High; far above needing partners.

      Liked by 2 people

    • @ Ken

      Also, you claimed it’s not eww but then got upset at his legitimate question because deep down you understand these things are not appropriate to ascribe to the Creator.

      Liked by 1 person

      • If God is creator and the Trinity is true from eternity past, then it is not a big deal for the second person of the Trinity to become a man, as Jesus did.

        God thought of and created the body, food, digestion process, sex, marriage, etc.

        It is you guys who think in terms of “eww”, etc.

        Like

      • The only thing inappropriate is the crass way that mr.healthcliff expresses himself.

        “banged her”, “wears balls”, “shits”, etc.

        You don’t know how to use appropriate language.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @ Ken

        “the Trinity is true from eternity past,”

        Except it’s not and clearly born out of extremism for the righteous which happens TO THIS DAY.

        “It is you guys who think in terms of “eww”, etc.”

        It’s not a matter of “eww” its a matter of something not being befitting. If God eats then He requires nourishment or will die. Because He depends on that food to live, that food is stronger than Him.

        Same with sex. One has sex in order to create children and pass themselves on. Because He is ever Living He does not do this.

        This is why He calls Himself As Samad (The Independent One). He needs absolutely NOTHING from His creation. To give an example, I can create a toilet does that mean I will allow people to dump waste on me? No.

        Like

      • “If God is creator and the Trinity is true from eternity past, then it is not a big deal for the second person of the Trinity to become a man, as Jesus did.”

        “creator”

        “become”

        “exist as a man”

        so let me ask, when jesus went to the toilet and was urinating, that was the divine PERSON urinating, right?

        did god CREATE himself urinating

        or

        was it the second person who is IDENTIFIED as divine person urinating?

        you have a choice of two

        since the PERSON of jesus MIXES with the natures, then logically the divine person was urinating and according to you “it is no big deal”

        so you worship a pissing god and you have no arguments against gods who piss.

        Like

    • Paul did not speak against sex within marriage.

      He affirmed it.
      1 Corinthians 7:2-5
      1 Corinthians 7:9

      Ephesians 5:21-33

      He was a good Jewish man who knew the book of Song of Solomon and Proverbs.

      Like

      • Paul was a liar who will rot in hell for eternity (unless by some miracle, he repented). The moron thought the end was coming in his lifetime and gave bad advice to his followers that it was better not to get married. For sure, many of his followers probably took his advice and like idiots, were waiting for the end to come, until they reached old age and died without ever marrying or having children.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Nope.
        He was commissioned by Al Masih Himself as an apostle.
        Probably God’s choice to replace Judas.
        Matthias was the other 11 apostles’ choice in Acts 1, but it seems God chose Saul / Paul to be the great apostle to establish churches, preach the gospel, and write a lot of Scripture.
        and he was approved of by the other apostles.

        https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2013/08/08/did-paul-preach-a-different-gospel-than-peter-james-and-john/

        Like

      • Uh huh, sure sure. The liar never met Jesus except in a supposed mystical encounter which only he really witnessed.

        Regardless, the false apostle thought the end was coming soon and so gave bad advice to people who could have married and had children but were probably left barren because they followed that fool.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ah yes, the Song of Solomon!

        “My beloved sent his hand from the net-work, And my bowels were moved for him.” (Young’s Literal Translation)

        I’ll just leave it at that.

        Like

      • the “bowels” is an old expression for deep feelings of emotion – “moved with compassion” deep within, the heart, the guts, etc.

        Nothing shocking there.

        Just saying “I have deep feelings and emotions for him”

        God’s record of wisdom for romance within Monogamous marriage between one man and one woman.

        Beautiful.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        How did you gain an endorsement for monogamy in this text lol? Solomon(as) the alleged author had TONS of wives, if anything one can argue from the passage one can still have romance with individual wives.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Because it was written when he only had one wife. Before he drifted from God in 1 Kings 11.

        It is in harmony with Genesis 2:24. The two become one.

        Song of Solomon is an enlarged commentary on Genesis 2:24-25

        Like

      • @ QB

        “Paul was a liar who will rot in hell for eternity (unless by some miracle, he repented). ”

        Yes and water is wet, let’s not state the obvious.

        Let’s instead point out how he threw an actually commissioned disciple Mathias under the bus to defend (to quote Shamoun) “profit” Saul.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @ Ken

        And you can tell he wrote this at that time because…

        Like

      • Did anyone notice that Kennywise is avoiding talking about how the false apostle Pau gave bad advice to people about not marrying? Paul thought the end was imminent. There was no other reason to advise people not to worry about marrying. Ergo, he was a liar and a false prophet.

        Liked by 2 people

      • No, he also said to get married in the very same chapter – 1 Corinthians 7:2-9
        7:36, 38, 39

        Both sections are surrounding the section that you are talking about.

        Like

      • But he said it was better not to get married dummy. He said the “time is short”. Why would he say that if he wasn’t convinced the end was near?

        Like

      • Many passages say the end is near, or “at hand”, or “will happen quickly, once it begins”. It means we are to live as if Jesus could return any moment, but there are also passages that state that certain things must take place before the end also.

        Matthew 24:14
        2 Thessalonians 2:1-8

        You are ignoring all the passages within the same chapter surrounding the ones you are emphasizing, which I gave you above.

        I Cor. 7:2-9
        7:28
        7:36, 38, 39

        It is both (most people will get married, but some should not), and yet only a few have the gift of singleness, as 1 Cor. 7:7 tells us.

        Like

      • Dummy, none of this explains why Paul would say that it was better to not get married. The only explanation is that the end is coming so getting married won’t really matter. What is the main purpose of marriage? To have children. What would be the point of that if the world was ending? Paul even said the “present world is passing away”. You would have to be an idiot to think this means something other than “the world is ending so don’t worry about getting married and having children”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • better for some, for those that have the gift of singleness

        Like

      • Blah, blah, blah.

        He said it was better not to get married because the “time is short”. He thought the end was near. He was wrong. Get over it.

        Liked by 2 people

      • 1 Corinthians 7:28 also, “But if you should marry, you have not sinned . . .

        “in view of the present distress” in verse 26 means in view of the persecutions and the turmoil in the Corinthian church – the economic conditions, etc.

        He never means “forever” – most people will get married.

        only some people have that gift (charismata) of singleness – 1 Cor. 7:7
        “each man has his own gift (ability) from God”

        Like

      • What I mean, brothers and sisters, is that the time is short. From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not; those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not; those who buy something, as if it were not theirs to keep; those who use the things of the world, as if not engrossed in them. For this world in its present form is passing away.” (1 Corinthians 7:29-31)

        Time is short means the world is ending, so it’s better not to concern yourself with frivolous things. He thought the end was near.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @ Ken

        You’re just saying that. Where is there in the text any reason to indicate he only has one wife?

        Like

      • @ Ken

        “for those that have the gift of singleness”

        You kinda just proved QB’s point it is not natural to be single nor is it superior. Jesus(as) never taught this.

        Like

  46. “Because it was written when he only had one wife. Before he drifted from God in 1 Kings 11.”

    where does it say that polygamy was the cause of his “drifting” ?

    “It is in harmony with Genesis 2:24. The two become one.”

    no white boy, genesis 2:24 is not against polygamy, but something about finding suitable partner for adam because animals and plants weren’t suitable.

    what has FINDING a suitable partner got anything to do with not having more than one wife?

    Liked by 1 person

    • ken temple is COMPLETELY shot even by christian standards, here is proof :

      “God’s order is that a man should take one wife. It was instituted as such in the garden of Eden. Polygamy then originated with the son of rebellious Cain (Gen. 4:16-19). Not a good example.” —

      Actually, God’s order was that a woman would leave her parents to cleave to her husband. Nothing inherent in that precludes multiple women cleaving to the same husband; indeed, we see multiple examples of that in Scripture. Also, if you want to make polygyny evil by association with Cain’s descendants (who are not called “ungodly” at all in the Scripture), then I hope you likewise avoid cities, animal husbandry, metalworking, and so on, all of which were pioneered by Cain or his descendants.

      “Many godly men had one wife (Adam, Isaac, Joseph, Moses, Boaz, Job, etc) and those who had many wives had much heartache as a result of it.” —

      I would argue that their heartaches were the result of other problems, not the multiple marriages. Also, if that’s the argument you want to use, then wouldn’t the high rate of divorce within the church be a fine argument against monogamy? Note that despite the common practice of polygyny in the Scriptures, there is not one divorce.

      “Why is it important that a man only have one wife? It’s almost impossible to raise a godly family in any other environment.” — I fail to see how you can establish that. Children are raised by parents, and that is no less true in a polygynist situation.

      /////

      your filthy CHURCH is divorcing too much, how many of them are going to start cutting out their eyes?

      Like

      • wuxistPhD | Early Christianity 33 points 2 years ago

        “it is clear that this text originally dealt with the production of children through the union of man and woman”

        I would have to strongly disagree with this interpretation and adamantly discourage it. This also looks to be yet another case where modern theological/ideological agendas have influenced an understanding of a verse—rather than, I might point out, aiming for a culturally and textually contextualized understanding.

        The Yawhist author here has a story he is telling and verse 24 must be seen in that context, and much of that story serves an etiological purpose that explains man’s origin and woman’s origin, as seen from the culture that produced this text. For instance, we are informed earlier in the story (2:18-20) that Yahweh attempts to find for man a companion (עֵזֶר כְּנֶגְדּוֹ) so that he is not alone. Per the etiology already established in the story (adam formed from adamah), the man’s life-companion is sought from the exact same essence as man was formed from—the adamah! It is only because Adam could not find a suitable companion among the creatures fashioned (yatsar) from the exact same essence/material that he was, and whom are also referred to as hayah nephesh like Adam (2:7, 2:19), that Yahweh must now form this companion not from the same material that Adam was made from, but from his very essence—his flesh (בָּשָׂר), 2:21. The woman is built (banah) from the man’s flesh.

        //////

        Like

    • Solomon Turns from God
      11 Now King Solomon loved many foreign women along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, 2 from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the sons of Israel, “You shall not [a]associate with them, nor shall they [b]associate with you, for they will surely turn your heart away after their gods.” Solomon held fast to these in love. 3 He had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines, and his wives turned his heart away. 4 For when Solomon was old, his wives turned his heart away after other gods; and his heart was not [c]wholly devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been. 5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Sidonians and after [d]Milcom the detestable idol of the Ammonites. 6 Solomon did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and did not follow the Lord fully, as David his father had done. 7 Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the detestable idol of Moab, on the mountain which is [e]east of Jerusalem, and for Molech the detestable idol of the sons of Ammon. 8 Thus also he did for all his foreign wives, who burned incense and sacrificed to their gods.

      9 Now the Lord was angry with Solomon because his heart was turned away from the Lord, the God of Israel, who had appeared to him twice, 10 and had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods; but he did not observe what the Lord had commanded. 11 So the Lord said to Solomon, “Because [f]you have done this, and you have not kept My covenant and My statutes, which I have commanded you, I will surely tear the kingdom from you, and will give it to your servant. 12 Nevertheless I will not do it in your days for the sake of your father David, but I will tear it out of the hand of your son. 13 However, I will not tear away all the kingdom, but I will give one tribe to your son for the sake of My servant David and for the sake of Jerusalem which I have chosen.”

      1 Kings 11:1-13

      Like

      • @ Ken

        Yes, I’m aware of how your political propaganda slanders the great prophet Solomon (as) and may their punishment double in the Fire.

        I’m asking you just gave a whole bunch of commentary of how this allegedly endorses monogamy (despite Solomon(as) a bunch of wives) and was written before he had multiple wives (with the text saying he’s had multiple for a long time). Prove this to me from the text alone what you claimed.

        Like

      • How is that political propaganda?
        The Jews admit that Solomon drifted from God, as 1 Kings 11:1-13 shows.
        Later he wrote Ecclesiastes and repented of his worldliness – multiplying wives, power, money, pleasure, etc.

        Like

      • You quickly turned away FROM the Hadith and Qur’an details that David Wood demonstrated his argument, you deflected to turn to your false claim against Jesus and the gospels.

        Like

      • there is no sin in polygamy. yhwhjesus SAID that if solomon obeyed, yhwhjesus would bless WITH more wives.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Its political propaganda against the Davidic dynasty. But anyways what hadith am I ignoring in saying Wood has committed a false equivalence fallacy (and a reading in between the lines fallacy)?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Are you saying the author of the book of Samuel (now divided into 2 books, 1-2 Samuel) had a political agenda against the Davidic dynasty.
        That makes no sense.
        Why would the Jewish people admit all that stuff up front about David and Bathsheba in 1-2 Samuel? (2 Samuel 11-12)

        The historical research principle of embarrassment points to the truth of it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @ Ken

        “Why would the Jewish people admit all that stuff up front about David and Bathsheba in 1-2 Samuel? (2 Samuel 11-12)”

        Oh well, that’s easy because they’re liars. They say a lot of stuff about Jesus(as) too. You willing to believe in that as well? (See Toldoth Yesu)

        “The historical research principle of embarrassment points to the truth of it.”

        Yeah, that doesn’t ALWAYS ring true that just increases the likelihood. For example, Catherine the Great had sex with a horse. Commonly believed in even nowadays, but complete fabrication. There was a lot of propaganda going on against the Davidic line but that’s beside the point.

        With this story, the BEST I can give you if I were to take this and try to reconcile it, the story went something like this:

        David(as) saw Bathsheba before while she was married to Uriah but never did anything with her. Uriah died in battle against the disbelievers and David(as) married her as a widow. Quickly into their marriage, Bathsheba got pregnant with Solomon (as). People, later on, spread rumors that David(as) had Uriah killed to get his wife and they were fooling around while he was alive

        Again it’s just a guess from the nature of people but that’s all I can give ya. When you combine it with the fact that this is Solomon’s(as)mother there is no doubt in my mind this is political propaganda against him and the Davidic line.

        Liked by 1 person

      • @ Ken

        Also, you get a like for asking a smart question and delving into critical thinking.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Thank you for that.

        Nevertheless your explaination does not make sense, since the Jewish leaders and community have always had these writings for centuries and both David and Solomon are both supported as true kings, even with their mistakes and sins, which are recorded for us to expose the sins of leaders; to teach us that no human leader is beyond falling into sin.

        But they both repented.

        David’s repentance is clear in Psalm 32, 38, and 51, especially 51.

        But God records the sins of people without approving of the sin and God records the consequences of David’s sins throughout the rest of the book of 1 and 2 Samuel.

        David and Solomon are both approved of at the beginning of 1 Kings, showing the transition to the Solomonic kingdom.

        Solomon was wise and only had one wife at the beginning. (Song of Solomon) We know this because it is compatible with his other writings, Solomon wrote most of Proverbs, and he wrote Proverbs 5:15-21; and monogamy is also the law of God for the kings according to the Torah – Deuteronomy 17:17 – for the king (v. 14-15) – Do not multiply wives, lest they turn your heart away from God.

        It also says the king of Israel should not multiply riches or horses (military power for war) for himself.
        Deuteronomy 17:14-20

        Later, he multiplied wives ( I Kings 11) and the text says that they caused his heart to turn away from God. He pursued pleasure and power and money and intellectual wisdom, which he confesses when he is older in the Book of Ecclesiastes, showing the folly of those pursuits, and at the end repented and was restored. (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14)

        “The end of the matter is this: Fear God and keep His commands, for God will bring every deed into judgment”, etc.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Again having something for centuries does not mean truth. Catherine the Great and the horse that’s going on about 3 centuries now. You for some reason don’t like to think people are liars. While sweet this just isn’t the case, especially when it comes to religion. There are two rival traditions going on in their text with one being pro the Davidic dynasty and the other being anti. This is simply taking shots at Solomon(as) and is basically calling his mother a hoe.

        I’ll ask again with someone who we both agree was righteous. The Jews say a lot of things about Jesus(as), they even wrote it in a book so it must be true!!! Please note my beginning about these people being liars. They killed the prophets so do you think they care about slandering them? Another example, they slandered Lot(as) JUST to insult their political rivals Moab and Ammon. They were saved by the Lord by parting the Red Sea and in few WEEKS were worshipping a Golden Calf. One would have to be really naive to think that these same people wouldn’t change the Scripture given to them.

        Finally doubt Deuteronomy even existed in Solomon’s(as) time (or Moses’s(as) for that matter) and is again political propaganda from Josiah (see Bible Unearthed) Again this story is inconsistent, David(as)) is allegedly denied to build the Temple because of it but idolatry is a BIGGER sin than murder or adultery but God allows an idol worshipper to build the Temple? Yeah…no

        Liked by 1 person

      • Catherine the Great and the horse that’s going on about 3 centuries now.

        That’s a dumb rumor that is hardly comparable to the Jews and their writings and history and traditions of their great kings, David and Solomon.

        You are slandering the prophets and Scriptures (the books of Allah). Believing in the books of Allah is one of the 6 pillars of belief. Shame on you.

        No. Deuteronomy written by Moses and probably final edit by Joshua after Moses died.

        Like

      • You are now entering into the Twilight Zone with all your “blame the Jews” conspiracy theories. Typical !! I have heard many other Muslims say this kind of thing. Really sad. You use their material when it is to your advantage and now completely abuse them and their Scriptures. Inconsistent and it is you who is being hypocritical.

        Like

      • @ Ken

        “That’s a dumb rumor…”

        Now you’re getting it. Again these people:

        1. Kill prophets
        2. Slander prophets (Jesus(as)
        3. Pretty much disobedient their entire history (even NOW, like they literally do the biggesst gay pride parade in the Holy Land)
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_gay_pride_parade
        4. Committed idolatry

        But you don’t think they would lie about other prophets and change the Scripture? That’s where they drew the line?

        Like

  47. “Islam is MAINLY rituals and external laws,”

    christianity worships a body and consumes it so christianity has enough time on its hands judging actions of people and at same time INDULGING in sin WITHOUT cutting off hands, eyes and ears.

    EVEN if islam was “mainly rituals and external laws” how would that be DIFFERENT from the following :

    quote:
    Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a basket. Instead, they set it on a lampstand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven. 17Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them

    thats yhwhs JEWISH laws BEING done for MEN to see …..

    ” with some mention of eternal sins in the heart, but it is not an EMPHASIS. ”

    problem is that the filthy religion of christianity is getting away with “eternal sins” by POURING it on a body and then magically the “righteousness” of “sinless” saviour is transferrred unto the christian yet christian CONTINUES TO live a LIFE of sin

    QUOTE :

    And ironically, Rabbi, that is exactly what Christians REALLY believe when they are not trying to convert people, but living their life in a cycle of sin and repentance. How many times have we seen the bumper sticker that reads, “Christians are not Perfect, just Forgiven”?

    This is the catch-22 they face. If God can forgive and welcome an imperfect person, then what is the need for Jesus? On the other hand, if they are still sinning even after accepting Jesus (and ALL of them are, by their own admission), then on what basis are they fit for God’s presence, if sinless perfection is the qualifying criteria? Think about this: if it is about “the blood of Jesus” and “Jesus dying for our sins”, then there is no need for repentance or even right-doing, since God does not consider your sin, but Jesus’ supposed perfection in your place.

    That is why Hebrews chapters 8-10 exposes the fatal flaw of Christian doctrine and the NT. No reason to even bother with the rest of the arguments. Christianity is self-defeating on its most basic premise.


    The Emphasis in Islam is on first conquering an area and establishing Sharia law and subjugating everyone.”

    evidence?

    Like

    • evidence?

      History – the growth of Islam by Jihad and force until someone stopped them. 722 Battle of Tours. 1600s – stopped Ottomans from constantly trying to take more of Europe through Vienna.

      Sicily

      conquered Greece for some 500 years until driven out.
      Conquered Spain and Portugal for some 500 years until driven out.

      until end of WW 1, 1917-1918; end of Caliphate in 1924, etc.

      Like

      • Battle of Tours date should have been 732 AD.

        Like

      • “History – the growth of Islam by Jihad and force until someone stopped them.”

        i didn’t ask you for a history lesson , i asked you for EVIDENCE from ISLAMIC sources . which verses?
        you mentioned “islam” so i thought you meant islamic texts

        Like

      • What is really interesting is verse 28 – “if you fear poverty, soon Allah will enrich you”. the reason for that was because Muhammad had conquered the Hijaz (the Arabian peninsula, especially around Mecca and Medina, and no pagans or idol worshippers were allowed. That means the Muslims could not get tax or penalty money from the pagans. Surah 9:5 – “fight the unbelievers where ever you find them”, proves this, and several Hadith that says “no two religions will be allowed on the Arabian peninsula” see Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 288, and other Hadiths, quoted at the bottom of this article *) They were all killed or driven out or converted to Islam. So now, there is no revenue from the pilgrimmages, so, according to verses 28-29, they will allow the Christians and Jews to be in the Islamic state, provided they surrender and don’t fight/resist, and pay the Jiziye with humiliation, and they cannot evangelize or build new churches or even criticize Islam.

        Qur’an 9:28—O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.

        Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

        Qur’an 9:30—The Jews call Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is a saying from their mouth; (In this) they but imitate what the Unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

        Ibn Kathir, The Battles of the Prophet, pp. 183-4— “Allah, Most High, ordered the believers to prohibit the disbelievers from entering or coming near the sacred Mosque. On that, Quraish thought that this would reduce their profits from trade. Therefore, Allah, Most High, compensated them and ordered them to fight the people of the Book until they embrace Islam or pay the Jizyah. Allah says, “O ye who believe! Truly the pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the sacred Mosque. And if ye fear poverty, soon will Allah enrich you, if He wills, out of His bounty, for Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” Therefore, the Messenger of Allah decided to fight the Romans in order to call them to Islam.”

        Tafsir Ibn Kathir (on Qur’an 9:30)—”Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated because they are idolaters and disbelievers. Allah the Exalted encourages the believers to fight the polytheists, disbelieving Jews and Christians, who uttered this terrible statement and utter lies against Allah, the Exalted. As for the Jews, they claimed that Uzayr was the son of God, Allah is free of what they attribute to Him. As for the misguidance of Christians over Isa, it is obvious.”

        Like

      • @ Ken

        Can’t even go a day without proving my point lol. All of 9:28-29 has been responded to. Also please review you being a liar. Thank you.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Should have been:

      ” with some mention of INTERNAL sins (that also results in eternal punishment unless repented of)
      in the heart, but it is not an EMPHASIS. ”

      Like

      • ” with some mention of INTERNAL sins (that also results in eternal punishment unless repented of)
        in the heart, but it is not an EMPHASIS. ”

        hey kafir, you really a scum bag.

        tell me what PARTICULAR sins the Quran identifies of every nation which it said Almighty punished?

        can you LIST those sins here :

        1

        2.

        3.

        4.

        ……

        Liked by 1 person

      • @ Ken

        Also as a note here the EMPHASIS is on a person’s intent (i.e what was in their heart)

        Like

  48. faiz or stew said something above about how the missionary will keep on repeating the same thing to hopefully catch out someone who doesnt know much about his religion.

    so the missionary will do his spiritual prostitution by telling person “its all ritual and external stuff….come to my religion you can imagine eating a human body and drinking its blood….”

    in other words the missionary wants to draw your worship to something you can IMAGINE and then tell you that his idol said beautiful things when reality is that STOIC philosophers, chinese philisophers, jewish philosophers, muslim philosophers said either the same thing or even better

    missionaries comes here is to create SPIRITUAL adultery ….notice how temple just constantly repeat same LIES again and again? because his heart is deep in idolatry.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: