Deuteronomy, chapter 18, verse 18.. To whom does this prophecy refer?"

Debmey

Where in the world did you get the idea that they "mixed up the prophesies"?  That sounds very foolish.  Now when a muslim give you the proof it's "oh, those people back then who were ALIVE DURING THIS TIME had no idea what they were talking about"?    That's a good one, however, there is not one christian scholar or passage in the bible that says "they mixed up the prophesies".  

Had the people understood the prophecies, they would not have asked teh wrong questions to John the Baptists at all.

As far as the evidence of the arabs being Ishmael's descendents:
Ishmael had children. Kedar was one of them.  Muhammad lineage has been traced to abraham through Kedar and his father Ishmael.  It is in YOUR bible.

There is no evidence to link Ishmael to Arabs. No where in the Bible does it say that a prophet will come from the descendenst of Kedar.

The Quran also bears witness that it was Isaac, not Ishmael, who was the chosen vessel for prophethood and kingship:

"And we bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and we established the prophethood and the Scripture among his seed." S. 29:27

The fact that seed refers to Israel is clarified in these passages:

"O children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others (for My message)." S. 2:47

"We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book, the Power of Command, AND PROPHETHOOD; We gave them, for Sustenance, things good and pure; and We favored them above the nations. And We granted them Clear Signs in affairs (of Religion): it was only after knowledge had been granted to them that they fell into schisms, through insolent envy among themselves. Verily thy Lord will judge between them on the Day of Judgment as to those matters in which they set up differences." S. 45:16-17

"O children of Israel! Call to mind the special favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others (for My message)." S. 2:122

If ishmael is not the father of the arabs, WHO IS DEBMEY???

Why don't you ask, if Ishmael is not the Father of Chinese, who is?
The burden of proof is on you to prove that Arabs descended from Ishmael and not for us to disprove Ishmael was the ancestor of Arabs.

Now this rubbish about chinese this, chinese that, these are his descendents too.  That may very well be true, which it isn't, but the problem for you still remains.  The problem is that NO CHINESE PERSON SAID THAT HE WAS THE PROPHET OF GOD PROPHESIED IN DEUT.  As a matter of fact, no prophet in the bible said that either.   Yes jesus was prophesied in the OT, but my friend, Deut 18:18 was not one of them.

You are the one who brought up the rubbish about Arabs being the kinsmen of Hebrerws which runs totally against logic.
Lookslike Muslism are nowhere in their claism that Deu 18 refeers to Mo.


Here's a good article that debunks all of Muslismclaims on the Bibel that Mo is a prophet.  

Originally posted by Debmey at 2003-9-3 11:38 PM:
Had the people understood the prophecies, they would not have asked teh wrong questions to John the Baptists at all.


There is no evidence to link Ishmael to Arabs. N ...

deb: Had the people understood the prophecies, they would not have asked teh wrong questions to John the Baptists at all.

The only person I have EVER heard saying it was the WRONG QUESTION is you.  What support do you have from the bible or from a christian scholar.  So far the answer is 0.

Deb:There is no evidence to link Ishmael to Arabs. No where in the Bible does it say that a prophet will come from the descendenst of Kedar.

Deb you are sidetracking the issue.  Muhammad, who WAS AN ARAB, was a direct DESCENDENT OF KEDAR.  Kedar is the child of Ishmael.  Ishmael is the child of abraham.  There is your link and your evidence.  

Deb: The Quran also bears witness that it was Isaac, not Ishmael, who was the chosen vessel for prophethood and kingship:

The Qur'an does state that Isaac and Jacob had prophethood.  As well as moses, jesus, lot, ishmael, and many other prophets.  What you don't realise is that THE QUR'AN WAS SENT BECAUSE THEIR FOLLOWERS SCREWED IT UP.  We are not muslim UNLESS we believe in ALL OF THE PROPHETS.  And, just like the hypocrite you are, you say that muslims can't use the Qur'an because it is not the word of God, BUT YOU USE (INCORRECTLY I MAY ADD) TO TRY TO PROVE YOUR POINT.  Got to be some truth in it somewhere huh?  

Deb:Why don't you ask, if Ishmael is not the Father of Chinese, who is?
The burden of proof is on you to prove that Arabs descended from Ishmael and not for us to disprove Ishmael was the ancestor of Arabs

you run out of answers and then say "you prove it".  Well, I answered this earlier:

Was Muhammad an arab?  YES
Was he a DESCENDENT of KEDAR?  YES
Was Kedar the SON OF ISHMAEL?  YES
Geesh, how much more do you need sir?


Deb: You are the one who brought up the rubbish about Arabs being the kinsmen of Hebrerws which runs totally against logic.

Totally against logic?  It is against your knowledge and not logic.  What is truly against logic is how you can say that the arabs and jews can be kinsmen, but YOU TRIED TO TIE THE CHINESE TO MOSES.:stp::bg::eek::cf:

Deb: Lookslike Muslism are nowhere in their claism that Deu 18 refeers to Mo.

Only when you do not want to look at things honestly.

Debmey

The only person I have EVER heard saying it was the WRONG QUESTION is you.  What support do you have from the bible or from a christian scholar.  So far the answer is 0.

The entire story of the gospels proves me right. Had they understood the propehcies, they would not have rejected Jesus and crucified him.

Deb you are sidetracking the issue.  Muhammad, who WAS AN ARAB, was a direct DESCENDENT OF KEDAR.  Kedar is the child of Ishmael.  Ishmael is the child of abraham.  There is your link and your evidence.  

Where is the evidence to show that Mo is a direct descendent of Kedar?
0

The Qur'an does state that Isaac and Jacob had prophethood.  As well as moses, jesus, lot, ishmael, and many other prophets.  What you don't realise is that THE QUR'AN WAS SENT BECAUSE THEIR FOLLOWERS SCREWED IT UP.  We are not muslim UNLESS we believe in ALL OF THE PROPHETS.  And, just like the hypocrite you are, you say that muslims can't use the Qur'an because it is not the word of God, BUT YOU USE (INCORRECTLY I MAY ADD) TO TRY TO PROVE YOUR POINT.  Got to be some truth in it somewhere huh?  

Read your Quran again.

The Quran also bears witness that it was Isaac, not Ishmael, who was the chosen vessel for prophethood and kingship:

"And we bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and we established the prophethood and the Scripture among his seed." S. 29:27

The fact that seed refers to Israel is clarified in these passages:

"O children of Israel! Call to mind the (special) favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all others (for My message)." S. 2:47

Was Muhammad an arab?  YES
Was he a DESCENDENT of KEDAR?  YES
Was Kedar the SON OF ISHMAEL?  YES
Geesh, how much more do you need sir?

All without evidence I'm afraid, you just assume and expect other to share your assumption. This is ridiculous.

Totally against logic?  It is against your knowledge and not logic.  What is truly against logic is how you can say that the arabs and jews can be kinsmen, but YOU TRIED TO TIE THE CHINESE TO MOSES.

If Arabs and Hebrews are kinsmen, then according to your definition & logic, so are Chinese and Malays and Indians.

Originally posted by Debmey at 2003-9-4 06:34 AM:
The entire story of the gospels proves me right. Had they understood the propehcies, they would not have rejected Jesus and crucified him.




Where is the evidence to s ...

Debmey, you are so far lost, it is amazing.  My statements are there and like any other you can take it or leave it.  This is childish, and eventually go nowhere for me.  Like I said before, I will not argue for the sake of arguing.  It is childish.

Debmey

Even if there are no misunderstanding of propehcies by the the people in John 1, it still does not make Mo the prophet described in Deu 18.

No problem... dia kata dia menang... kita kasi TROPHY BODO sama Debmey....

Debmey

No monkey talk here mr.Kampong.

peace

Originally posted by Debmey at 2003-9-4 08:14 AM:
Even if there are no misunderstanding of propehcies by the the people in John 1, it still does not make Mo the prophet described in Deu 18.

You said that you have been studying islam for for years, ok fine.  How long have you been studying Christianity?  WHO IS THE PROPHET THEN?

Debmey

The point of this thread is, a Muslim started this thread claiming that Mo was the prophet described in Deu 18 which I have shown that is not true.
The burden is on Muslims to prove that Mo is the one, not for me to prove that there was no misunderstanding on the part of the people asking questions in John1. By tryiong to go along this path in argument, Muslims have shown that they have lost the case.

Truth.8

Originally posted by amorist at 3-9-2003 06:16 PM:
Is that so? Well, perhaps this one might wake you up:

Galatians 3

23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the ...

and....what law does the bible talking about? hve u finished reading the entire Bible? I guess not. :nana:

Debmey

i think none of the muslims here even have a copy of the Bible.
Of course they will lose when they try to take on the Bible against Chrsitians.
The funny thing is, we have Muslims that don't even know that the injil was supposed to be a book in Islamic beliefs.
Hahahahahahahaa................

Truth.8

Originally posted by Debmey at 4-9-2003 01:01 PM:
i think none of the muslims here even have a copy of the Bible.
Of course they will lose when they try to take on the Bible against Chrsitians.
The funny thing is, we have Muslims that don't even ...

The Injil is full of lies because Islam are afraid that they will lose their faith.

No proof until now that Injil is exist. Even it exist, it Muslims who created it.

Debmey

Actually, when Mo spoke about the Injil & Torah in the Quran, he was indeed refering to the OT & NT that Jews & Christians had. The belief that the Bible is the word of God was Islamic doctrine until the 10th century, abt 300 years after Mo died.

What happened was that serious Islamic schorlars began to examine both the Bible and Quran has found that the two contradicted each other. They decided that since the Quran cannot be wrong, it was the Bible that was corrupted and they made that decision w/o any proofs of corruption.
Through teh ages, Musliosm began to conjure up stories abt how the Bible was corrupted but as you know these are nothing but lies, such stories always ended up with lots of illogics and loose ends that muslism cannot explain.
They even stick to such beliefs when Bible manuscripts which are 2300 years old are found to correspond with those used today.  
Thats what I call ultimate blindness and denial. That makes Muislism teh biggest bunch of bigots by default.

amorist

Originally posted by Truth.8 at 2003-9-4 12:54 PM:
and....what law does the bible talking about? hve u finished reading the entire Bible? I guess not. :nana:

It is obvious that you are rejecting what is in the bible.

Of course, you have to stick to your imaginary understanding of the bible verses because otherwise, you would be totally confused about your faith!

The fact remains that Paul was anti-Law. He even refused to pass on a message from James to the Asians because it said to avoid certain foods.

This is the message that he refused to pass on:

Acts 15
(James said: ) 19"It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood."

Paul, being anti-Law, refused to deliver this simple message. What he did was to deliver his own maligned message:

Galatians 2:10 They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.


It is therefore not surprising that Jesus prophesized to the Ephesians:
"I know your works, your labor, and your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars."  Rev. 2:2 NKJV

Certainly, Paul was the only person who went to Ephesus claiming to be an apostle of Jesus Christ. Certainly, the Jews of Ephesus rejected him and later had him arrested in Jerusalem. James's explanation of why the Asian Jews were after Paul is enlightening:

Acts 21:21
They have been informed that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs.

So Paul was clearly anti-Law! He was trying to tell the Ephesians and other Asian churches to leave the laws of Moses!!

Of course, he failed, starting from Ephesus. Paul himself had to admit that the Asians rejected him, when he wrote:

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

Clearly, he was the false apostle mentioned by Jesus. Clearly, he was anti-Law. So, for the sake of God, for the sake of what Jesus actually preached, please understand Colossians 1:16 from the perspective of someone who is anti-Law!

Colossians 2:16
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.

Debmey

Even if what you claim is correct, which of course it isn't, how does that change the fact that mo is not the prophet described in Deu 18?
Are you admitting defeat already? Yopu Muslism finally admit your folly? Good for you.

peace

Originally posted by Debmey at 2003-9-4 02:22 PM:
Actually, when Mo spoke about the Injil & Torah in the Quran, he was indeed refering to the OT & NT that Jews & Christians had. The belief that the Bible is the word of God was Islamic doctrine unt ...

Again, no evidence to support this.  The old testament is not the Torah.  ONLY THE FIRST FIVE BOOKS OF THE OLD TEST. IS THE TORAH.  And it is not the same as it was originally revealed.


Jeremiah 8:8 - How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain.   

8 " 'How can you say, "We are wise,
for we have the law of the LORD ,"
when actually the lying pen of the scribes
has handled it falsely? (niv)

I do not have to say it has been changed.  The bible says it.  Get over it.

Debmey

Sorry bro Criteria, whatever yu claim cannot support the Muslim claim of mo being the prohet described in Deu 18. You given up already? So easy? You sure you don't wnat to try harder?

Originally posted by Debmey at 2003-9-4 11:22 PM:
Sorry bro Criteria, whatever yu claim cannot support the Muslim claim of mo being the prohet described in Deu 18. You given up already? So easy? You sure you don't wnat to try harder?

why not answer the previous post.  You are pathetic and play too many games.  The bible says the torah has been corrupted and you go back to Deut 18.  I am not in the mood to play games.

Debmey

No need to answer, unless I want to fall into your cheap trick of trying to distract from the thread.

You can start a new thread anytime on a new topic and I'll meet you there and expose you good once again. A Muslim can only take one exposure for each thread, I won't make it difficult for you.

peace

Originally posted by Debmey at 2003-9-4 12:52 PM:
The point of this thread is, a Muslim started this thread claiming that Mo was the prophet described in Deu 18 which I have shown that is not true.
The burden is on Muslims to prove that Mo is th ...

You miss the point.  The prophesy goes UNFULFILLED without Muhammad.  It matters to me not whether you want to believe, but deb, you should want to fill that void for your own salvation.  Who was it if it wasn't muhammad?  You can't answer can you?  Well, I'm done with this too.  You never answer questions.  You just post another question to get out of the heat.