Posts Tagged ‘Galilee’

Anyone please quote from such Jews or Muslims who believe Jesus and Holy Spirit as god; I think not a single Jew or Muslim would be found

June 7, 2009

Edbooked says:

Who, other than Christianity, would describe the one God worshiped by Christians, Jews, and Muslims as three persons? Yet that is how the biblical writers perceived God to be revealed to humanity. They perceived the one
God; being revealed as creator Father, as obedient son even unto death and as consoling Holy Spirit and counselor.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend edbooked

The Jews and Muslims don’t believe Jesus as god or the Holy Spirit as god. Please quote from such Jews or Muslims who believe Jesus and Holy Spirit as god; I think not a single Jew or Muslim would be found believing such thing. Even Jesus did not believe like that.

This game started with Paul; when Jesus secretly moved away from Galilee to India, after have esacpaed a cursed deatho on Cross; Paul thought it an opportune time to bring superflous ideas to mar the simple teachings of Jesus who always followed in the line of Moses.

The deserting sinful scribes of gospels also followed Paul.

I am sorry to state; that the prsent Christians though call themselves after the Christ; yet they are followers of Paul, and not of Jesus.

What is your denomination/faith? This is only requested for clarity in perceiving you standpoint; no compulsion however. Please don’t mind.

I love Jesus and Mary as I love Moses and his mother.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Jesus’ escape from death on Cross was a miracle; it was no ordinary event

June 6, 2009

Yourbrotherinchrist says:

The Messianic phrophecies foretold of the Messiah dying for His people. This was fulfilled with Jesus’ death on the cross.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend yourbrotherinchrist
Jesus did not die on the Cross; so it is wrong to think that there were any such prophecies; in fact it was a misconception that was never there in the scriptures and hence it never materialized.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the Promised Messian, the Second Comings says:

There is the statement of Jesus: ‘But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee’ (Matthew: chapter 26, verse 32). This verse clearly shows that Jesus, after he had come out of the tomb, went to Galilee and not to heaven.

Jesus’ words ‘After I am risen’ do not mean his rising up alive after he was dead; rather, as in the eyes of the Jews and the common people he had died on the Cross, he used words beforehand consistent with what they were to think of him in the future, and indeed, the man who was placed on the Cross, in whose hands and feet nails had been driven till he had fainted from pain, had become as good as dead; if such a man was saved from such a calamity and if he recovered his senses it would not be an exaggeration on his part to say that he had come to life again.

There is no doubt that after so much suffering, Jesus’ escape from death was a miracle; it was no ordinary event. But to think that he had died is wrong. It is true that in the books of the New Testament words of this kind occur, but this is a mistake of the writers of those books, just as they had committed mistakes in recording several other historical events.

Commentators who have made researches into these books admit that the books of the New Testament have two parts: (1) the spiritual instruction received by the disciples from Jesus (peace be on him) which is the essence of the teachings of the Gospel; (2) historical events — like the genealogy of Jesus; his arrest and his being beaten; the existence in his time of a miraculous pond, etc.

These, the writers recorded by themselves; they were not revealed; rather, they were set down in accordance with the writer’s own ideas. In some places there are undue exaggerations, as where it is stated that if all the miracles and works of Jesus were recorded in books, the earth would not be able to accommodate these books. How exaggerated is this statement!

Apart from this, it is not against usages of speech to describe the great calamity which had befallen Jesus as death. When a man, having passed through a life and death experience, is ultimately saved from it, the common speech of all peoples expresses the idea by the idiomatic expression — ‘he was given a new life’, and no people to whatever country they may belong would demur at expressing that idea in this way.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html
I love Jesus and Mary as beautifully and rationally described in Quran.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Jesus did not care to furnish his opponent Jews with the slightest proof of his glorious new body acquired; on the contrary, he took fright and fled to Galilee

June 1, 2009

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the Promised Messiah, the Second Coming says:

All talk of anything contrary to this is absurd — as the one about the Jews having bribed the soldiers in order to make them say that the disciples had stolen the corpse while they (the soldiers) were asleep. If the soldiers were asleep they could be very well asked how they came to know in their sleep that the corpse of Jesus had been stolen away.

From the mere fact of Jesus not being in the tomb, can anybody in reason believe that he had gone up to heaven? May there not be other causes as a result of which tombs might remain empty. At the time of going up to heaven, it was up to Jesus to meet a few hundred Jews, and also Pilate.

Whom was he afraid of in his glorious body. He did not care to furnish his opponents with the slightest proof. On the contrary, he took fright and fled to Galilee.

That is why we positively believe that though it is true that he left the tomb, a chamber with an opening, and though it is true that he secretly met the disciples, yet it is not true that he was given any new and glorious body; it was the same body, and the same wounds, and there was the same fear in his heart lest the accursed Jews arrest him again.

Just read attentively Matthew, chapter 28, verses 7 to 10. These verses clearly say that the women who were told by someone that Jesus was alive and was going to Galilee, and who were also told quietly that they should inform the disciples, were no doubt pleased to hear this, but they went with a terrified heart, — they were still afraid lest Jesus might still be caught by some wicked Jew.
The ninth verse says, that while these women were on their way to inform the disciples, Jesus met and saluted them.

The tenth verse says that Jesus asked them not to be afraid, i.e. of his being caught; he asked them to inform his brethren that they should all go to Galilee22; that they would see him there, i.e., he could not stay there for fear of the enemy.

In short, if Jesus had really come to life after his death and had assumed a glorious body, it was up to him to furnish proof of such life to the Jews. But we know that he did not do this.

It is absurd, therefore, to accuse the Jews of trying to render negatory the proof of Jesus’ coming to life again. No, Jesus himself has not given the slightest proof of his restoration to life; rather, by his secret flight, by the fact of his taking food, and sleep, and exhibiting his wounds, he himself proved that he did not die on the Cross.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

Jesus fleeing secretly from Pilate’s jurisdiction; emigrating from that place, as was the practice of prophets; and traveling under the shadow of fear — all these events are conclusive that Jesus did not die on the Cross

May 29, 2009

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the Promised Messiah, the Second Coming says:

It is possible some may be entertaining in their hearts the objection that the gospels repeatedly say that Jesus died on the Cross, and then having been brought back to life, went up to heaven.

This kind of objection I have already briefly answered, but I might say again that Jesus’ (peace be on him) meeting the disciples after his Crucifixion; his traveling up to Galilee; eating bread and meat; his display of wounds on his body: staying a night with the disciples at Emmaus; fleeing secretly from Pilate’s jurisdiction; emigrating from that place, as was the practice of prophets; and traveling under the shadow of fear — all these events are conclusive that he did not die on the Cross; that his body retained its mortal character; and that it had undergone no change.

There is no evidence in the gospels that anyone saw Jesus ascend to heaven; and even if there had been such evidence, it would have been unworthy of credence, for making mountains out of mole-hills and magnifying small things into big seems to be a habit with the gospel writers.

For example, if one happens to say that Jesus is the Son of God, another sets about making him into a full-fledged God, the third invests him with power over the whole universe, and the fourth bluntly says that he is everything, and that there is no other God besides him. In short, exaggerations carry them very far away.

If one considers the vision in which the dead were seen to come out of their graves and to make for the city, one would notice that this vision had been given its outer and apparent interpretation, so far as to say, that the dead had literally risen out of their graves and come to the city of Jerusalem, where they had paid visits to their people.

Now, just see, how a ‘feather’ has been made into a ‘crow’; and, then it is no longer one crow, but many million. When things are so exaggerated, we have no means of finding out the truth.

It is further worth considering that these gospels, called the Books of God, contain preposterous claims, such as that, if all the works of Jesus had been reduced to writing, these could not have been accommodated in the whole world! Is such exaggeration the way of honesty and truth?

If the works of Jesus were so unlimited, and if they could not be circumscribed, how is it that they were confined to a period of three years? Another difficulty about these gospels is that they give wrong references to some of the earlier books; they do not state accurately even the genealogy of Jesus.

From the gospels it appears that these persons were dull of understanding, so much that some of them took Jesus for a ghost.

These gospels from the earliest times have been open to the charge that they have not preserved the purity of their texts, and there being many other books called gospels, there is no sound reason why all the statements of these other books should be rejected, and why all that is contained in the gospels generally so called should be admitted as true.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

Jesus never went to heaven; rather, coming out of the tomb, he went to Galilee; — like an ordinary man, in normal clothes, with a human body

May 26, 2009

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908, the Promised Messiah, the Second Coming says:

In short, the verse I have just quoted shows that Jesus after coming out of the tomb went to Galilee.

The gospel of St. Mark says that after coming out of the tomb he was seen going on the road to Galilee, and ultimately he met the eleven disciples when they were at their meal; he showed them his hands and feet which were wounded and they thought that he was perhaps a spirit. Then he said to them:

Behold my hands and my feet, that it is myself; handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have4

He took from them boiled fish and a piece of honeycomb and ate them in their presence.5

These verses show that it is certain that Jesus never went to heaven; rather, coming out of the tomb, he went to Galilee; — like an ordinary man, in normal clothes, with a human body.

If he had been resurrected after death, how was it that this body of spirit could still have borne the wounds inflicted upon him on the Cross?

What need had he to eat? And if he required food then, he must be in need of food even now.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

Jesus did not die on Cross: some arguments by D.F.Strauss

December 17, 2008

http://books.google.com/books?id=5_A…sult#PPA409,M1
“A New Life of Jesus” By David Friedrich Strauss (1808 –1874),a German theologian and writer.

We might, therefore, refuse to acknowledge in the resurrection of Jesus any miraculous objective occurrence for the following reasons.

The Evangelical evidence, on which the belief of that occurrence originally rested, is far from giving that certainty which it ought to give in order to make such a miracle credible.
2. In the appearances after the resurrection, the accounts of which are given in the Evangelists, the advocates of this view keep exclusively to those features which seem to point to a perfectly natural corporeality;
1. For in the first place it does not come from eye-witnesses,
2. secondly the different accounts do not agree, and
3. thirdly they give a description of the nature and movements of the subject after the resurrection which contains in itself contradictory elements.

Inasmuch, then, as the ecclesiastical view of the matter, as regards the last point, admits only the possibility of a miracle, the essence of which involves characteristics which are, according to human notions, self-contradictory, an attempt is made to take another point of view, and to understand the Evangelical accounts in such a manner that they shall not contain such contradictions.
According to this the Resurrection of Jesus takes the form of a natural occurrence,

1. his condition after it is the same as it was before it.

a. the marks of the wounds,
b. the tangibility,
c. the eating, which is here taken to be not merely a power of eating, but also as a want of sustenance.

3. On the other hand, they endeavour to set aside by an evasive explanation the opposite characteristics which point to something spiritual in the nature of Jesus after the resurrection.
a. The fact of the disciples, as is sometimes stated, being afraid at his appearance (Luke xxvii. 37 ; John xxi. 12) is intelligible,
b. they say, on the supposition that they really believed that he was dead, and thought consequently that what they then saw of him was his shade ascended from the world below.
c. The travellers to Emmaus did not recognise him for some time.d. Mary Magdalene thought he was the gardener.

4. The first of these is explained sometimes by the disfigurement of his features by suffering,

5. sometimes by supposing that he had not marked features;

6. the latter from the circumstance that having risen from the grave unclothed from the sepulchre he had borrowed clothes from the neighbouring gardener.

7. While the doors were shut he stood suddenly in the midst of his disciples.

8. Even Schleiermacher considers it self-evident that the doors had been opened for him before.

9. They see here, they say, a proof of the fact that the body which Jesus brought from the grave was not a glorified one,
a. but severely wounded and hurt,
b. and gradually recovering.

10. And this proof is the improvement shown in his state of health between the morning of the resurection, when he forbade Mary Magdalene to touch him (John xx. 17),

11. and eight days later, when the healing of his wounds had advanced so far that he himself invited Thomas to do so.

12. Again in the morning he stays quietly in the neighbourhood of his grave,

13. in the afternoon he feels already strong enough for an expedition to Emmaus, three hours distant,

14. and some days later undertakes even the journey to Galilee.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

The truth about Jesus’ resurrection from the dead

July 27, 2008

gavmbree Says:
July 24, 2008 at 9:14 pm

“4. If he didn’t really die and only passed out, then what happened years later if he eventually died? Why would Christianity have spread, if those that started it knew that it was a lie?
Also, the NT text clearly indicates throughout that Jesus really died and was really resurrected. My authority is the Old and New Testaments of The Holy Bible which is the Word of God.”

Paarsurrey Says:

Hi

Jesus got a new life after the tribulations faced by him on the Cross. By the grace of GodAllahYHWH he survived a cursed death on Cross. Without dying Jesus got a new life; this is a metaphoric usage, in my opinion, in all the language of the world. If one is sick with a deadly disease or faces a trauma in real life, when there is no hope for survival, it is commonly said that that person has got a new life. It is never taken as literal or physical life from the actually dead.

It is only a smartness of Paul or his cleverness that he made the humble Christians, simple minded sheep for centuries, to believe that Jesus had resurrected from the dead. He tried to make a mythical hero from the real Jesus. It was his attempt to win over the Christians by adding another feather to the hat of Jesus – whereas Jesus charisma needs nothing of the sort.

Even though I know that Jesus did not die a cursed death on Cross or he was not never resurrected from the dead; my love of Jesus and Mary is not lessened, since reality is always greater than the myth. Myth is only a fiction; isn’t it a reality?

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Promised Messiah 1835-1908 Says:

From the mere fact of Jesus not being in the tomb, can anybody in reason believe that he had gone up to heaven? May there not be other causes as a result of which tombs might remain empty. At the time of going up to heaven, it was up to Jesus to meet a few hundred Jews, and also Pilate. Whom was he afraid of in his glorious body. He did not care to furnish his opponents with the slightest proof. On the contrary, he took fright and fled to Galilee.

That is why we positively believe that though it is true that he left the tomb, a chamber with an opening, and though it is true that he secretly met the disciples, yet it is not true that he was given any new and glorious body; it was the same body, and the same wounds, and there was the same fear in his heart lest the accursed Jews arrest him again.

Just read attentively Matthew, chapter 28, verses 7 to 10. These verses clearly say that the women who were told by someone that Jesus was alive and was going to Galilee, and who were also told quietly that they should inform the disciples, were no doubt pleased to hear this, but they went with a terrified heart, — they were still afraid lest Jesus might still be caught by some wicked Jew.

The ninth verse says, that while these women were on their way to inform the disciples, Jesus met and saluted them. The tenth verse says that Jesus asked them not to be afraid, i.e. of his being caught; he asked them to inform his brethren that they should all go to Galilee; that they would see him there, i.e., he could not stay there for fear of the enemy.

In short, if Jesus had really come to life after his death and had assumed a glorious body, it was up to him to furnish proof of such life to the Jews. But we know that he did not do this. It is absurd, therefore, to accuse the Jews of trying to render negatory the proof of Jesus’ coming to life again. No, Jesus himself has not given the slightest proof of his restoration to life; rather, by his secret flight, by the fact of his taking food, and sleep, and exhibiting his wounds, he himself proved that he did not die on the Cross.
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

I would humbly request all the searching souls to form their own truthful opinion and when fully satisfied they should accept the truth and support it.

The exaggerated accounts of the NTBible

June 17, 2008

 

tree63fan Says:
June 16, 2008 at 3:11 pm   

 

Hi again,

I am curious what reason you have for “knowing” the NTBible accounts are exaggerated? I wasn’t there to watch things unfold, and historical and archaelogical references all match up with everything that has been uncovered to date. I have found no reason to doubt the NT accounts as they are written. Also, what information do you have that the scribes were not the disciples or not friends who were dicating what the disciples told them to write (as they claim in some instances)? Many of the disciples were not educated, therefore could not write. The educated, like Luke who was a doctor, could write for themselves. The differences in the accounts are actually something that helps to validate the writings, NOT invalidate. It would be far more fishy if all the gospel accounts said EXACTLY the same thing. When many people witness the same events, there are always slightly differing accounts of what occurred. The Gospels follow this pattern.
Thanks!

 

Paarsurrey replies:

 

Hi tree63fan!

 

I respect your faith; one could have any faith as a human being and I have no objection to that, I would only respect and love the man inside.

I would like to quote here,for the time being, from the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 that the accounts of the NTBible written by scribes are exaggerated; and I think it would be interesting for you.

Therefore, there is no doubt that Jesus was not crucified, i.e., he did not die on the Cross, for his personality did not deserve the underlying consequence of death on the Cross. Not having been crucified, he was spared the impure implications of a curse, and no doubt it also proves that he did not go to heaven, for going to heaven formed part of this whole scheme and was a consequence of the idea of his having been crucified. Therefore, when it is proved that he was neither accursed, nor did he go to hell for three days, nor did he suffer death the other part of the scheme, namely, that he went to heaven, is proved to be wrong. On this point the Bible has more evidence which I proceed to state below. There is the statement of Jesus: ‘But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee’ (Matthew: chapter 26, verse 32). This verse clearly shows that Jesus, after he had come out of the tomb, went to Galilee and not to heaven. Jesus’ words ‘After I am risen’ do not mean his rising up alive after he was dead; rather, as in the eyes of the Jews and the common people he had died on the Cross, he used words beforehand consistent with what they were to think of him in the future, and indeed, the man who was placed on the Cross, in whose hands and feet nails had been driven till he had fainted from pain, had become as good as dead; if such a man was saved from such a calamity and if he recovered his senses it would not be an exaggeration on his part to say that he had come to life again. There is no doubt that after so much suffering, Jesus’ escape from death was a miracle; it was no ordinary event. But to think that he had died is wrong. It is true that in the books of the New Testament words of this kind occur, but this is a mistake of the writers of those books, just as they had committed mistakes in recording several other historical events. Commentators who have made researches into these books admit that the books of the New Testament have two parts: (1) the spiritual instruction received by the disciples from Jesus (peace be on him) which is the essence of the teachings of the Gospel; (2) historical events — like the genealogy of Jesus; his arrest and his being beaten; the existence in his time of a miraculous pond, etc. These, the writers recorded by themselves; they were not revealed; rather, they were set down in accordance with the writer’s own ideas. In some places there are undue exaggerations, as where it is stated that if all the miracles and works of Jesus were recorded in books, the earth would not be able to accommodate these books. How exaggerated is this statement!
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

I like your comments;kindly keep in touch. Please treat it only as a friendly discussion not as a contentious debate. God bless you!

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim


%d bloggers like this: