105 replies

  1. What prophecy of the Messiah you have in Islam?

    Like

  2. Daniel 9:24-27 speaks of Messiah’s coming and atoning work (the first 3 things mentioned in verse 24)

    “to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity,”

    and that the 2nd temple would be destroyed AFTER the Messiah is “cut off” (killed).

    Isaiah 52:13-15 and
    Isaiah 53:1-12

    is all about one person (singular pronoun, “he”) who would be the suffering servant and atonement for sins. He is also “cut off’ from the land of the living. (killed) (see Isaiah 53:8)

    Therefore, Isaiah 52-53 is about the Messiah who be the substitutionary sacrifice / atonement for sins.

    Jesus Al Masih knew Himself to be the Messiah who fulfilled that prophetic passage. (Mark 10:45; Matthew 20:28)

    Therefore, Paul W., you are wrong.

    Like

    • Did the Jewish Bible predict a messiah who would die for the sins of the world?

      Ken Temple thinks Daniel 9:24-27 does. So let’s have a look at the verses:

      24 “Seventy weeks are decreed for your people and your holy city: to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place. 25 Know therefore and understand: from the time that the word went out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the time of an anointed prince, there shall be seven weeks; and for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with streets and moat, but in a troubled time. 26 After the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing, and the troops of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. 27 He shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall make sacrifice and offering cease; and in their place shall be an abomination that desolates, until the decreed end is poured out upon the desolator.”

      Does this passage predict a messiah who would die for the sins of the world? Nope.

      ———————–

      Next Ken suggests Isaiah 52:13-15 and Isaiah 53:1-12.

      These passages are too lengthy to reproduce here. It is clear however:

      1) that NOWHERE is a messiah mentioned!

      2) that the Servant in question is clearly Israel, God’s people: see Isaiah 44:1, 44:21 and 49:3.

      There are four relevant passages: Isaiah 42:1-4, 49:16, 50:4-11, and 52:13 to 53:12. In these passages, the Servant of Yahweh is said to have suffered horribly for the sake of other. But God will vindicate him.

      Notice that in Isaiah 52:13 – 53:12 the author is not predicting that someone will suffer IN THE FUTURE for other people’s sins. Consider the verb tenses. They don’t say someone WILL come along at a later time and suffer in the future, but that the Servant has ALREADY suffered. And so it’s not about a future suffering messiah. The context indicates the Servant in question is Israel. This is the conclusion of nearly all OT scholars.

      Therefore, Ken T., you are wrong.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Pennywise is like a pre-recorded tape left on autoplay.

        Liked by 4 people

      • He is an entrenched fundamentalist who never learns. I thank God I escaped this trap.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Yes it does, when you understand Jesus’ claim to be the Al Masih (The Messiah) in the NT (and also by the way, Islam’s recognition that He is the Messiah / Al Masih AND virgin Born and Word (logos) and taught the Gospel (injeel). Islam unknowingly, unwittingly, unconsciously affirmed those NT basics and then later when the ignorance of your prophet proved that it contradicted on most all other points, then they had to anachronistically come up with other explanations for the contradictions to Islam itself. it is a massive dilemma for you.

        to die – messiah will be cut off – verse 26
        the first 3 things that Messiah accomplishes in verse 24 is exactly what you are claiming is not – to be the atonement for sin – for all peoples / nations – for the world – the NT gives the command to spread the message to all nations.
        to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness,

        As for the verb tenses of Isaiah 52:13-53:12 – you don’t understand the Hebrew idea of perfect tense and imperfect tense and poetry – the perfect tense in this poetic prophecy does not mean past tense in time, but perfect in the sense of completion.

        You have a very shallow understanding of Hebrew grammar and poetry and prophecy.

        Quit using the argument that the word “Messiah” is not in Isaiah 52-53, when NO passage that modern Jews use has the word Messiah in it, for what they believe are “Messianic”. It is a bad argument that you are using.

        You are an entrenched Muslim fundamentalist who is inconsistent in using liberal arguments in an inconsistent way that are logical contradictions to Islam and the Qur
        ‘an that assumes and has presuppositions of a holy God who communicates and sent prophets and books and affirms the previous Scriptures. Yet you turn around and dis the very Scriptures that your book unwittingly confirms!

        Like

      • However, the context simply does not allow for such an interpretation. In fact, the events described in Daniel 9 can be reliably traced to historical events which occurred during the struggle between the Jews and the Seleucids in the 2nd-century BCE, and not the 1st-century CE. As Hammer explains:

        “…the final week (i.e. seven years) is the crucial period, starting with the murder of Onias III, the high priest (described as the removal of ‘one who is anointed’ in verse 26) in 171 B.C. Halfway through this period has occurred the desecration of the temple, when Antiochus ‘put a stop to sacrifice and offering’ (verse 27).”[209]

        Furthermore, “The Jewish Study Bible” observes regarding the “Anointed One” that (emphasis in the original):

        “[i]n the context of the other historical references…the anointed leader probably refers to either Zerubbabel or the high priest Joshua (Ezra 3.2; Hag. ch 1; Zech. 6.9-15, while the anointed one is most likely the high priest Onias III, killed in 171 BCE (2 Macc. 4.30-34).”[210]

        Another reason the prophecy cannot be referring to Jesus (peace be upon him) is that the death of the “Anointed One” was supposed to happen 62 weeks (434 years) after the declaration to rebuild Jerusalem. The year of Jesus’ alleged death is not known with any certainty, though Christians generally settle for the year 30 CE. However, since Christians also cannot ascertain with certainty as to when the declaration to rebuild Jerusalem was even made, only through generous assumptions can they finagle the chronology of events to coincide (and only roughly at that!) with the approximate year of Jesus’ death! For example, Christian apologist Matt Slick admits:

        “…there is much debate among scholars regarding the decree to which Daniel is referring. There does not seem to be an easy solution.”[211]

        He and other apologists generally settle on the year 457 BCE as the most likely date of the declaration, but even with that assumption, the prophecy fails to complete the full 483 years required, since 483 minus 457 equals 26. In other words, the death of the “Anointed One” should have occurred in the year 26 CE. But, the earliest date for Jesus’ death is assumed to be 30 CE![212]

        Moreover, as Chris Sandoval notes, the Christian interpretation ignores the clear parallels between chapters 8 and 9, the former of which definitely refers to the tyranny of Antiochus IV.[213] Thus, the interpretation posited by Christians is rather fanciful.[214] It is clear that the correct interpretation is that the prophecy was referring to events in the 2nd-century BCE.

        https://quranandbibleblog.wordpress.com/2016/09/16/the-book-of-daniel/

        Liked by 2 people

      • Like Paul said, Pennywist the clown is an entrenched fundamentalist. I would also add “brainwashed zombie” to that.

        We can see that Daniel 9 has a clear historical context that deceitful Christians like Pennywise conveniently ignore.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ken

        Look again at Isaiah 52:13-15 and Isaiah 53:1-12.

        FACT: NOWHERE is a messiah mentioned!

        FACT: that the Servant in question is clearly Israel, God’s people: see Isaiah 44:1, 44:21 and 49:3.

        In these passages, the Servant of Yahweh is said to have suffered horribly for the sake of other. But God will vindicate him.

        The context indicates the Servant in question is Israel. This is the conclusion of nearly all OT scholars.

        Have a nice day.

        Liked by 3 people

      • “He is an entrenched fundamentalist who never learns. I thank God I escaped this trap.”

        The irony

        Like

    • @Ken Temple

      Hi Ken since we’re discussing whether the messiah can die for the sins of the world i have some questions for you if thats all right.

      first question: are these statements,

      “Mankind has sinned against an infinite God, and therefore the sin is infinitely great. It takes an infinite being to atone for infinite sin, and the only infinite being is God. Therefore, since Christ atoned for sin, Christ must be God.”

      a correct understanding regarding you’re belief on the matter?

      Liked by 1 person

  3. The Jesus of history and of Islam are identical in 2 important respects:

    they both identify as a prophet of God.

    They both denied being God.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Massively wrong.

      The Jesus of History is the Messiah & Suffering Servant & eternal Son of God and Word of God and resurrected LORD that commands you to repent of your unbelief and rebellion against the Living God.

      Jesus is a prophet, but more than a prophet.

      He is God in the flesh, virgin born, sinless, crucified, dead, accomplished atonement, resurrected LORD over you.

      Islam could not even get established history right, nor the 600 years of Christian truth and all that is involved in the doctrine of Christ – Deity, Trinity, eternal Sonship, etc – which proves your Scriptures are not inspired. They are one man’s subjected claim. a humanly created religion. There is nothing miraculous about it. (No Holy Spirit, no accurate knowledge of previous Scriptures or history, etc.)
      It was brute force of unjust aggressive war against Persia and Byzantine and then later vs. Hindus and Buddhists, etc.

      Like

      • Massively wrong Pennywise. We have seen you crash and burn on this and other issues before. Mindlessly repeating the same Christian garbage will not convince reasonable people who uses their God-given intellect.

        Liked by 3 people

      • No, Faiz – you are more like Pennywise the violent blood thirsty violent clown. Your religion has spawned some of the most violence of aggressive warfare and conquering in history. (Persia, Byzantine, conquering N. Africa, Spain, etc. Ottomans, India (Pakistan & other Muslim areas vs. Hindus), Buddhist areas, etc. You mindlessly repeat your Islamic principles also. You are a zombie, dead in your sins – Ephesians 2:1-3 – by nature a child of wrath; enslaved to satan and the powers of darkness.

        Like

      • Hey Pennywise, shouldn’t you be in the sewer crying?

        You are a lying scumbag who insists that people be as dumb and deceitful as you. Sorry Pennywise, that ain’t gonna happen. Your pagan religion has no power in front of reasoned arguments. It’s no wonder you start whining when you get put in your place.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Nothing you say ever bothers me. I have never whined, etc. I just call you out for your hypocrisy and evil heart of hatred and not following your religion in Surah 29:46.

        Jesus Al Masih has all power to convert your heart. But it is His will to do so. Persuasive human arguments are man-made religion and humanistic power – which is what Islam is – the ultimate man made humanistic religion of warfare and force.

        The Spirit of God has to sovereignly convince people on the inside and that is up to God if and when He may have mercy on you. So far, you are storing wrath upon yourself for the day of judgement.

        Your evil heart character is evidence that Islam has no power over hatred or dirty talk or insults, etc.

        Like

      • Uh huh, sure, sure. Whine little clown. I will drink your tears. Lying scumbags need to cry when they are called out for their lies and propaganda.

        Like

      • My dear, dear Ken.

        The Jesus of history was just a man.

        However, some later gentile Christians made him into a god.

        We now know it was quite common in Jewish and gentile antiquity to call great men “god” or “son of god” or “divine”.

        Jews and gentiles did this. They did it to Jesus too. Objective scholarship has uncovered this development.

        Read the sad story by a Jewish expert in the period:

        Liked by 4 people

      • Virgin born man.
        Even Islam believes this.

        Hummmm, I wonder if your Jewish expert Geza Vermes accepts that Jesus is virgin born, the Messiah, did miracles, spoke the truth, prophesied, walked on water, healed the blind and lame, raised 3 people from the dead, etc. ?

        Consistent with Islamic claims?

        my dear dear Paul.

        Like

      • Dearest Ken,

        I am not in the least interested what his private religious views might be.

        My only interest is in him as a world-class historian of the first century. He demonstrates with meticulous evidence how Jesus was made into a god.

        Surely you are aware how common in Jewish and gentile antiquity it was to call great men “god” or “son of god” or “divine”.

        You do realise that Jews and gentiles did this?

        Liked by 3 people

      • Nope; it cannot follow with virgin birth, Al Masih, etc. (contradictions to Islam)

        Like

      • If the Islamic world ever allowed any of these “world class historians” to critique the Qur’an and Muhammad, there would be half of Muslims go liberal (like in the west) and the other half would go all Al-Qaeda and Isis and/ or Faizy on them with Takfirs and insults.

        Like

      • please try and engage with the historical questions Ken.

        Surely you are aware how common in Jewish and gentile antiquity it was to call great men “god” or “son of god” or “divine”.

        You do realise that Jews and gentiles did this?

        Liked by 1 person

      • the 4 gospels are all historically true and reliable.
        The virgin conception and birth of Christ is true to history; 2 gospels demonstrate this.

        Islam also agrees. so there. Boom, Geza Vermes is wrong.

        Like

      • Estaqhfr’allah
        there is only one God !

        Like

      • “Virgin born man.
        Even Islam believes this.

        Hummmm, I wonder if your Jewish expert Geza Vermes accepts that Jesus is virgin born, the Messiah, did miracles, spoke the truth, prophesied, walked on water, healed the blind and lame, raised 3 people from the dead, etc. ?

        Consistent with Islamic claims?

        my dear dear Paul. ”

        LOL, Pennywise deflects again!

        Liked by 1 person

      • “If the Islamic world ever allowed any of these “world class historians” to critique the Qur’an and Muhammad, there would be half of Muslims go liberal (like in the west) and the other half would go all Al-Qaeda and Isis and/ or Faizy on them with Takfirs and insults.”

        Awww, what’s the matter Pennywise? You have to deflect with your whining?

        If “world class historians” critique the Quran, we look at their arguments and refute them. We don’t start crying like you and deflect by saying “oh, they’re liberal, so there…” You see the difference, clown? So, it’s you who engages in ad hominem arguments, silly boy.

        Liked by 2 people

      • “the 4 gospels are all historically true and reliable.
        The virgin conception and birth of Christ is true to history; 2 gospels demonstrate this.

        Islam also agrees. so there. Boom, Geza Vermes is wrong.”

        If Geza Vermes didn’t believe in the virgin birth, who cares? He doesn’t believe it because he regards the gospels are unreliable books written by anonymous people. How does affect a Muslim?

        The important point is that Geza Vermes, like all historians, denies the historicity of the resurrection, which absolutely destroys Christianity. It’s no wonder Pennywise has to deflect.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @ Ken

        Who told you Muslims in the West are liberal, lol?

        Like

      • I did not mean all Muslims in the west are liberal; I only meant that there is more liberal westernized Muslims because they have that freedom to choose and not the fear of being punished or executed by Sharia law force and pressures.

        Like

      • Obviously, not all Muslims in west are liberal. But more are than in Muslim countries, etc.

        Like

  4. Hebrew Tenses
    Sometimes it is claimed that the messianic prophecies cited by Christians are in the past tense. Therefore, it is said, they cannot refer to a future, coming Messiah.

    This is an invalid argument. There is no such thing as “tense” in biblical Hebrew. (Modern Hebrew, on the other hand, does have tenses.) Biblical Hebrew is not a “tense” language. Modern grammarians recognize that it is an “aspectual” language. This means that the same form of a verb can be translated as either past, present, or future depending on the context and various grammatical cues. The most well known grammatical cue is the “vav-consecutive” that makes an imperfective verb to refer to the past.

    Therefore it is wrong to say that Isaiah 53 or other prophecies are in the “past tense.” Biblical Hebrew has no tenses. There are many examples of what is wrongly called the “past tense” form (properly called “the perfective” or “perfect”) being used for future time.

    This fact was recognized by the medieval commentators as well as by modern grammarians, as shown by the following citations.

    Medieval Jewish grammarian and commentator David Kimchi on the prophets’ use of the perfect for future events:

    “The matter is as clear as though it had already passed.”

    David Kimchi, Sefer Mikhlol. Cited in Waltke, Bruce K. and O’Connor, Michael Patrick. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990), p. 464 n. 45. They reference Leslie McCall, The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System: Solutions From Ewald to the Present (Sheffield: Almond, 1982), p. 8.

    Rabbi Isaac ben Yedaiah (13th century)

    [The rabbis] of blessed memory followed, in these words of theirs, in the paths of the prophets who speak of something which will happen in the future in the language of the past. Since they saw in prophetic vision that which was to occur in the future, they spoke about it in the past tense and testified firmly that it had happened, to teach the certainty of his [God’s] words – may he be blessed – and his positive promise that can never change and his beneficent message that will not be altered.

    Saperstein, Marc. “The Works of R. Isaac b. Yedaiah.” Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1977, pp. 481–82. Cited in Daggers of Faith by Robert Chazan, Berkeley: UC Press, 1989, p. 87.

    From the standard grammar of Biblical Hebrew, Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar (section 106n, pp. 312–313):

    More particularly the uses of the perfect may be distinguished as follows: – …To express facts which are undoubtedly imminent, and, therefore in the imagination of the speaker, already accomplished (perfectum confidentiae), e.g., Nu. 17:27, behold, we perish ,we are undone, we are all undone. Gn. 30:13, Is. 6:5 (I am undone), Pr. 4:2…. This use of the perfect occurs most frequently in prophetic language (perfectum propheticum). The prophet so transports himself in imagination into the future that he describes the future event as if it had been already seen or heard by him, e.g. Is. 5:13 therefore my people are gone into captivity; 9:1ff.,10:28,11:9…; 19:7, Jb. 5:20, 2 Ch. 20:37. Not infrequently the imperfect interchanges with such perfects either in the parallel member or further on in the narrative.

    David (“Fortress of David,” 18th-century commentary by David Altschuler) on Jeremiah 31:32:

    “I will place – lit. I placed. This is the prophetic past. I will incline their hearts to keep the Torah.”

    Cited in Rosenberg, A. J. Jeremiah: A New English Translation. New York: The Judaica Press, 1985, vol. 2, p. 255.

    Contemporary Jewish commentator Nahum Sarna on Exodus 12:17, “for on this very day I brought your ranks out of the land of Egypt.”:

    This is an example of the “prophetic perfect.” The future is described as having already occurred because God’s will inherently and ineluctably possesses the power of realization so that the time factor is inconsequential.

    Exodus: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991), p. 59.

    From the recent textbook of Biblical Hebrew, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Sec. 30.5.1.e, pp. 489–490):

    Referring to absolute future time, a perfective form may be persistent or accidental. A persistent (future) perfective represents a single situation extending from the present into the future.

    Until when will you refuse to humble yourself before me?

    Exod 10:3

    With an accidental perfective a speaker vividly and dramatically represents a future situation both as complete and as independent.

    And concerning Ishmael… I will bless him.

    Gen. 17:20

    Women will call me happy.

    Gen. 30:13

    We will die. We are lost, we are all lost.

    Num. 17:27

    This use is especially frequent in prophetic address (hence it is also called the “prophetic perfect” or “perfective of confidence”).

    I see him, but not now; I behold him, but not near. A star will come out of Jacob

    Num. 24:17.

    In the past he humbled… in the future he will honor… The people walking in darkness will see a great light.

    Isa. 8:23–9:1

    Waltke and O’Connor [full reference given above], pp. 489–490.

    Like

    • Ken, lets see how scholarly Christian translations (by actual experts in biblical Hebrew) translate Isaiah 53:1-12. See my notes about the tenses (in parentheses).

      Isaiah 52:13-53:12 – New Revised Standard Version

      13 See, my servant shall prosper; (Isaiah expects his contemporaries in 8th century BC to “see” this)
      he shall be exalted and lifted up,
      and shall be very high.
      14 Just as there were many who were astonished at him (‘were’ – past tense)
      —so marred was his appearance, beyond human semblance,
      and his form beyond that of mortals—
      15 so he shall startle many nations;
      kings shall shut their mouths because of him;
      for that which had not been told them they shall see,
      and that which they had not heard they shall contemplate.
      53 Who has believed what we have heard?
      And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
      2 For he grew up before him like a young plant, (note the past tense)
      and like a root out of dry ground;
      he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, (note the past tense)
      nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
      3 He was despised and rejected by others; (note the past tense)
      a man of suffering and acquainted with infirmity;
      and as one from whom others hide their faces
      he was despised, and we held him of no account. (note the past tense)

      4 Surely he has borne our infirmities (note the past tense – this has ALREADY occured)
      and carried our diseases;
      yet we accounted him stricken,
      struck down by God, and afflicted.
      5 But he was wounded for our transgressions,
      crushed for our iniquities;
      upon him was the punishment that made us whole,
      and by his bruises we are healed.
      6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
      we have all turned to our own way,
      and the Lord has laid on him
      the iniquity of us all.

      7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,
      yet he did not open his mouth;
      like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,
      and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,
      so he did not open his mouth.
      8 By a perversion of justice he was taken away.
      Who could have imagined his future?
      For he was cut off from the land of the living,
      stricken for the transgression of my people.
      9 They made his grave with the wicked
      and his tomb with the rich,
      although he had done no violence,
      and there was no deceit in his mouth.

      10 Yet it was the will of the Lord to crush him with pain.(note the past tense – this has ALREADY occured)
      when you make his life an offering for sin,
      he shall see his offspring, and shall prolong his days;
      through him the will of the Lord shall prosper.
      11 Out of his anguish he shall see light;
      he shall find satisfaction through his knowledge.
      The righteous one, my servant, shall make many righteous,
      and he shall bear their iniquities.
      12 Therefore I will allot him a portion with the great,
      and he shall divide the spoil with the strong;
      because he poured out himself to death,
      and was numbered with the transgressors;
      yet he bore the sin of many, (note the past tense – this has ALREADY occured)
      and made intercession for the transgressors.

      Liked by 1 person

      • no. You failed to read or comprehend the Hebrew perfect and imperfect tenses. I gave you lots of scholarly references on that.

        The perfect tense does not mean “the past”, but rather complete – those are prophetic perfects of the future – for sure it will happen and accomplish it.

        Like

      • furthermore, all English translations translate the Hebrew perfect as “past” into English.

        the new Revised Version that you cited is fine – same for NIV, NASB, ESV, KJV, Holman Christian Standard, etc.

        It is the prophetic perfect into the future.

        Like

      • So all these Christian translations choose to put the verbs into the past tense.

        Methinks you have no idea what you are talking about! Even your own translators disagree with you!

        Liked by 3 people

    • We shouldn’t be surprised that Pennywise thinks he knows better than everyone, even the conservative Christians scholars whom he promotes when they agree with him but throws them under the bus when they don’t. I mean this guy even thinks he know better than his own god, as we saw in his pathetic attempts to declare polygamy a sin even though God literally said that he gave Saul’s WIVES to David and would give him more if he wanted (2 Samuel 12:8).

      Liked by 2 people

  5. He and other apologists generally settle on the year 457 BCE as the most likely date of the declaration, but even with that assumption, the prophecy fails to complete the full 483 years required, since 483 minus 457 equals 26.

    The text shows that 26 AD is about right, (for the appearing of the Messiah = His anointing at His baptism by the Holy Spirit) – as the appearing of “Messiah the Prince” (verse 25)and His baptismal anointing was around 26 AD and then crucifixion was 3 and 1/2 later, around 30 AD. The final week was around 26 to 33/34 AD.

    The “cutting off” (verse 26) and “making a firm / strong covenant” (verse 27) was in the middle of last period of seven years – around 30 AD (“this is the new covenant in My blood” – Matthew 26; Mark 14; Luke 22), and then the last 3 and 1/2 years of the last period of seven years is when the gospel started going out to the Gentiles and conversion of Saul of Tarsus, the apostle Paul – around 34 AD.

    Jesus Al Masih عیسی المسیح Himself said that the destruction that was decreed (verse 27) is about the destruction of the second temple in 70 AD. (Matthew 24:15 – spoken of through Daniel the prophet –

    15 “Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),

    Matthew 23:31-39 and 24:1-3 – shows Jesus predicting the destruction of the temple was the Messiah’s confirmation that 70 AD was the final stage of judgement on Israel and fulfillment of Daniel 9’s last part that the destruction is decreed (prophesied by Jesus around 30 AD), after the 70 periods of seventy years. (490 years)

    Like

    • spoken like the uneducated fundamentalist you are Ken.

      Where is your proof Jesus said it?

      Liked by 1 person

      • I got one of his books a while back, based on your recommendation (and he rightly rebuked Raymond Brown, one of your other favorite modern liberal scholars) and also many others and we read Bultmann, etc. in seminary. M. Div. = master’s degree – I have read lots of other viewpoints and lots of liberal scholars and Muslim and atheist stuff also.

        Not accepting their anti-supernatural presuppositions is not the same thing as “uneducated”.

        I have an M. Div. Do you have a masters degree, Paul ?

        Like

      • Matthew is a reliable eye-witness of Jesus ministry and one of the “Twelve” disciples.

        His gospel is also “God-breathed”.

        You use it to support some of your views when convenient (like Matthew 5:19) and then you dis it when it does not fit your anachronistic Islamic agenda. Inconsistent.

        Like

      • “You use it to support some of your views when convenient (like Matthew 5:19) and then you dis it when it does not fit your anachronistic Islamic agenda. Inconsistent.”

        Exposing hypocrisy of an entrenched fundamentalist.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ken, don’t forget my question:

        Where is your proof Jesus said it?

        Liked by 1 person

  6. The proof is Matthew 24:15.

    Those are Jesus’ historical words. God-breathed scripture.

    Like

    • No one cares what Matthew the liar says. He was more at home being a comic book writer than an “inspired” author of the word of God.

      The context of Daniel 9 is obvious to people who use their reason. That doesn’t include Pennywise. The “Anointed One” was Onias III who was killed by Antiochus IV.

      Liked by 1 person

    • so you have no evidence. Just belief.

      I figured as much.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Why do christians attribute to the authors something they didn’t claim to their writings?
      Moreover, even if the authors of gospels had claimed that to their writings, which they did not, christians now( in modern era) are in Waiting state. Your state regarding the acceptance of the whole book is contingent on the latest findings. You see Ken, centuries ago, no one dared to question the ending of Mark for example, let alone to deny it. The same can be said about the verse about the adulteress.You have no argument here, Ken. Stop repeating yourself with this nonsense.

      Liked by 3 people

    • St. Paul wrote to Timothy that only the Jewish scriptures are God-breathed. Nothing else.

      Correct your presupposed theology or look into the God of the kingdom inside of you.

      Liked by 1 person

      • No, 2 Timothy 3:16 includes the NT also, since in 1 Timothy 5:17-18 he quotes the law and the gospel together and calls them both “the Scriptures”. 2 Tim. 3:15 is about the OT yes, but then verse 16 expands it to “All Scripture”. That principle extends even to books written in future time to 2 Timothy. (around 67 AD before Paul is executed.) Peter said all of Paul’s letters are Scripture in 2 Peter 3:15-16 and so all 27 books of NT are “God-breathed” by principle and by their internal quality and testimony that was powerful upon the church in the first century. The discovered and discerned what was already “God-breathed”. The church did not decide what was God=breathed.

        Like

  7. how much money do you get paid for posting comments here ? we know that u do not wish to be like the rich man (i wish the rich man used jesus’ excuse, “you will always have the poor, let me keep at least 3oo dinari for a nice smelling funeral)

    Liked by 2 people

  8. This is well worth the 16 minutes to listen to.

    William Lane Craig did an excellent job and also the apologist (after the interview) who argued for earlier dating of the gospels; vs. Ben Shapiro, a modern young conservative Jewish man (who is great on moral and political issues, by the way.)

    The historical facts of the resurrection prove Jesus of Nazareth was and is the Messiah of the OT and the eternal Son of God / Word of God, who was virgin born and lived a sinless life and was God incarnate.

    Like

  9. @ Ken

    “Jesus Al Masih has all power to convert your heart.”

    But can’t do miracles if one doesn’t believe…

    Liked by 2 people

Trackbacks

  1. Brother Vaqas Refutes Christianity in One Post – The Quran and Bible Blog

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: