Posts Tagged ‘Jesus’

Budha, Jesus “Conversion after death”

May 21, 2018

Conversion after death

Post#149 paarsurrey wrote:

I believe that Buddha was a non-Jewish prophet/messenger of G-d and Jesus was a Jewish prophet/messenger of G-d, they both were in different ages, so they need not to accept one another, by name. I believe that they both are in heaven and are very close to G-d. They both received enlightenment from the same G-d, it is for this, that their teachings and many events have much similarity.
Hence, neither Buddha needs to convert to become a Christian, nor Jesus needs to become a Buddhist. They both were treading the same truthful path that lead to G-d. Right, please?



  • Like Like x 2
  • Winner Winner x 1

The fictional “human sacrifice” of Jesus

November 15, 2017

The fictional “human sacrifice” of Jesus for the atonement of Pauline-Christians’ sins neither took pace nor it was ever needed. JW’s including, all the Pauline-Christianity people , who bank for their sins upon Jesus’ “human sacrifice” are as sinful as they would have been without it, please.

Thread: “Roman executioner’s are not priests,” 
and the cross is not an altar 
Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma

X——— wrote:
Roman executioners are not priests, and the cross is not an altar. So how can Jesus execution be considered a “payment for sin”? In any kind of a theologically legal sense, that is.

If Jesus death is truly a legal “payment for sin” as Paul seems to teach, and as Jehovah’s Witnesses claim, (ransom), then wouldn’t his death have to be performed on the Temple altar, at the hands of a Jewish priest?

1) Is the idea of Jesus death as a “payment for sin” anything more than a metaphor? A metaphor that is useful for Paul and his followers, but not for everyone.

2) Is the notion of Jesus martyrdom as a “payment for sin” Divine revelation? Or theological speculation.

3) Seems Paul wanted to play the legal, Priestly game in regard to Jesus death, so why wouldn’t the legal, priestly rules have disqualified his interpretations?

4) Is Pauline blood-atonement theology legalistic?

5) Would Jesus have approved of such a legalistic approach?

Please address any combination of the above.

Paarsurrey wrote:

One’s points are very reasonable.

Since Jesus survived death on the Cross as he was delivered in near-death position from the Cross, he was treated in the tomb by his friends for his injuries inflicted upon him on the Cross. Jesus remained in hiding, met only to his followers secretly, did not meet the public or the “adulterous Jews” to whom he was to show a sign as promised by him, and went out of Judea lest the Jews catch him and crucify him again.

The fictional* “human sacrifice” of Jesus for the atonement of Pauline-Christians’ sins neither took pace nor it was ever needed. JW’s including, all the Pauline-Christianity people , who bank for their sins upon Jesus’ “human sacrifice” are as sinful as they would have been without it, please.


*One may like to read:
The Pagan Christ

“The Pagan Christ: Recovering the Lost Light is a 2004 non-fiction book by Canadian writer Tom Harpur (1929-2017), a former Anglican priest, journalist and professor of Greek and New Testament at the University of Toronto, which supports the Christ myth theory.[1] Harpur claims that the New Testament shares a large number of similarities with ancient Egyptian and other pagan religions, that early Church leaders fabricated a literal and human Jesus based on ancient myths, and that we should return to an inclusive and universal religion where the spirit of Christ or Christos lives within each of us.

The book was named the Canadian non-fiction bestseller of the year by both the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail. It was later released under the title The Pagan Christ: Is Blind Faith Killing Christianity? in the United States by Walker Books and in Australia by Allen Unwin.

“What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?”

October 31, 2017

Thread: “Did Jesus and or John the Baptist believe in Trinity? ”

Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Islam

 Post 21: 

—— wrote:
How do you identify which parts were added later? What is your method?

paarsurrey wrote:

Some of them I give below:
1. Jesus was a Jew, he followed the teachings given by Moses so anything in the NT Bible that is against the teachings of Moses, is not from Jesus.
2. Jesus metioned things in the usage of Torah of Moses, so anything Jesus said is to be interpreted from the usage of Moses’ Torah.
3. YHVH’s on attribute is All-Wise, so anything against the normal or against the reason/wisdom or the common sense is not from YHVH whom Jesus believed and addressed as God-the-Father.
4. The most ancient Bibles reportedly didn’t have them but the later versions show them. The textual anaylasis of the Bible done by the scholars point them out.

And there are other points which I mentioned in the thread “What is the correct way to interpret the Bible?”, forum Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma . Right, please?



The method of purification of Bible suggested by me is reasonably inferred from the above Jesus’ core teachings.

1. “This is the first and greatest commandment” hence, I think, Jesus would be happy if it is used as touch stone of his teachings and those which contradict with it are dubious and must be discarded.
2. “All the Law”; here he means that his teachings are for revival of Moses’ law; those of his teachings that conform to it only that must be accepted the rest discarded. This adds further purity to # 1.
3. “And the Prophets”; if the teachings have been mentioned by the prophets that further would ensure correctness.
4. “Love your neighbor as yourself”; all teachings that your neighbors don’t understand being mythical, not accepted by common sense and unreasonable should not be accepted.

Quran also confirms this principle:

[3:8] He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book; in it there are verses that are decisive in meaning — they are the basis of the Book — and there are others that are susceptible of different interpretations. But those in whose hearts is perversity pursue such thereof as are susceptible of different interpretations, seeking discord and seeking wrong interpretation of it. And none knows its right interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord.’ — And none heed except those gifted with understanding. —

I think with this measure Judaism, Christianity and Islam; even other revealed religions (Buddhism, Hinduism and Zoroastrianism etc) come on to the same page.

hanks and regards


Paarsurrey wrote:

The aesthetics as well as the meaning are important.
Whatever the language of a book (here Quran) the meaning of a word is best understood in the verse/sentence it is used, and the true meaning of a sentence is best understood in the passage (some preceding and some following sentences of the verse in focus ), a passage could be best understood in its chapter, and so on a chapter is best understood in the whole book or Quran. Then there is a context of a place (space) and time, there could be many correct translations to a word (or say a verse/sentence/passage/chapter) if the context is not against it (rather approves and supports it). If somebody assumes a wrong meaning, the context could out-rightly reject it. When one tries to understand the things deeply then one has to resort to etymology of the words and etymology of a word brings forth a new realm of meaning, its history, culture etc.
Quran is pragmatic, it addressed the pagan Meccans, then the people around Christians, Jews , Zoroastrians and others; then the whole world at that time, in the past and also in future.
So it is deeper and deeper and deeper; language is not as important as are the meanings, and meaning of life and humanity.

Quran is best understood “with reference to the context” tool

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend paul8bee

You may start reading Quran. It is not a voluminous book. It might be a little larger than the four gospels combined.

It provides guidance on temporal, moral and spiritual matters. Quran does not want that it should be believed only as a book of authority from an authority. It provides the wisdom to a thing and reason and logical arguments, in a way, that it is not a tedious book like the books of philosophy which are full with difficult terminology not understood by the common man. It mentions wisdom for the Philosophers, experts and the common people all at one time; as it is guidance for everybody.

Even of I don’t quote from the Quran, I write taking wisdom from it which convinces others, as first I am myself convinced with it. If I sometimes mention that I have taken this reasoning from Quran; it is for the reason that it would morally be bad for me if I take something from a sources yet without acknowledging it. Can we ignore the rights of an author? No we cannot.

I think I should give here an example.
As I understand from your blog, you have made a lot of research on spirits, and I appreciate that.

Quran mentions following points in this connection:

1. Everything in the Universe has been created by the Creator God Allah YHWH; if that is correct then logically the spirits which are in this Universe, are created by Him. This is exactly mentioned in Quran, as I understand from it. If you differ with it, no compulsion; then give your reasoning on this point.

2. Creator God, by definition is the one who has created everything, yet He has been created by none; that make Him self-existing. I think you also agree with it; no compulsion.

3. God is only eternal; so logically the spirits are his creation, so the spirits could not be eternal. You may give reasoning if you differ with this; however no compulsion.

4. When partners meet, husband and wife, the creation of a child starts, till it reaches a form fit to receive life. God commands the spirit or soul into the fetus, so it is logical to believe that the spirit or soul grows and or evolves within the fetus. Yet, I acknowledge that I have taken all these points from the Quran. Quran mentions claims and reason.

5. I would like to submit here and one must note it that it is only Quran from amongst the Revealed Word, which provides us the text for a claim and also a pertinent reason thereof within the usual context which often consist on five preceding and five following verses, in my opinion.

6. This make Quran a Book of Systems or a book with wonders, which is sufficient in itself to testify that Quran is not authored by a man, impossible to do by a man, but by the Creator God Allah YHWH himself has authored it.

There is however no compulsion to believe in Quran, blindly. But it will also not be fair if we see a truthful system in it, yet we deny it. It would be just killing the truth, in my opinion.

This is what we experience in our everyday life also. There is no compulsion to believe that this world is physically working under a set of systems, which are only discovered by the scientists yet not created by them. If there would have been no physical systems, rather haphazardness; this Universe won’t work and the Scientists won’t be able to propound theories and discover Laws and making any inventions. They only would find a system or knowledge if it already exists but inherent in the things.

If the Scientists would deny such systems, within and without us, that would tantamount denying the Science and Knowledge and Truth altogether; yet there is no compulsion but only an acknowledgement of the Truth.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Human interpretation can twist the entire message


“Jesus mission. Which is it?” 

October 11, 2017

Which is it?
Jesus mission.

Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Christianity and Apologetics

Post 28: 

E——n wrote:
Matthew 15.24

He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”



Matthew 28.19


Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,


What was Jesus mission, his intended audience?

How does one reconcile the two seemingly contradictory statements?

Is the “Risen Christ” on the same page as the pre-Easter, “historical Jesus”?

Paarsurrey wrote:

Jesus’ mission was precisely and specific towards the Beni Israel or children of Israel:

[3:46] When the angels said, ‘O Mary, Allah gives thee glad tidings of a word from Him; his name shall be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, honoured in this world and in the next, and of those who are granted nearness to God;
[3:49] “And He will teach him the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel;
[3:50] “And will make him a Messenger to the children of Israel (to say): ‘I come to you with a Sign from your Lord, which is, that I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it a new spirit and it will become a soaring being by the command of Allah; and I will heal the night-blind and the leprous, and I will quicken the dead, by the command of Allah; and I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. Surely, therein is a Sign for you, if you be believers.
[3:51] ‘And I come fulfilling that which is before me, namely, the Torah; and to allow you some of that which was forbidden you; and I come to you with a Sign from your Lord; so fear Allah and obey me.
[3:52] ‘Surely, Allah is my Lord and your Lord; so worship Him: this is the right path.’ ”
Jesus was a follower of Moses and was to reform Moses’ followers and set them on teachings descended on Moses from the On-True-God. Jesus mission was not to propagate creeds like Trinity which is similar making and worshiping “Golden Calf” done while Moses was alive and as per Torah Moses had to kill three thousand Jews*.
Right, please?

*Exodus 32:28

27 He said to them, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, ‘Every man of you put his sword upon his thigh, and go back and forth from gate to gate in the camp, and kill every man his brother, and every man his friend, and every man his neighbor.'” 28 So the sons of Levi did as Moses instructed, and about three thousand men of the people fell that day.

Did apostles think they were writing the ‘word of God’? 

October 9, 2017

Post 21: Did apostles think they were writing the ‘word of God’?

paarsurrey1 wrote:
NT Gospels were anonymous verbal narratives*, adopted and doctored by Paul**, his associates**, and the Church**, and named after apostles^ just for credulity/ credence. Right, please?
***”All the Gospels are Anonymous Until 180-185CE”:^

r—-g wrote:

Hmmm. Ok. So tell me then — what would motivate Paul to do that ? Do you choose to discard God’s mercy and grace thru Christ so easily which is God’s gospel message thru Paul?

paarsurrey1 wrote:

Paul had no message of One-True-God’s mercy and grace with him, neither from One-True-God nor from Jesus.Paul was an enemy of Jesus and his followers and he remained as such when Jesus migrated from Judea. Paul only changed his strategy. He changed the message of One-True-God and corrupted the teachings of Jesus. Paul did it very cleverly aide by his associates and the Church established by him in the name of Jesus-Christ. Jesus never established any Church, he was a Jewish Prophet and remained as such, please.
Isn’t it strange, please?




NT Bible consist of glimpses of Word of G-d only

June 30, 2015

<> Thread : A good heated discussion.

Please click the post # below to view,comment and join discussion on the topic.
Post #229

Paarsurrey wrote:

I agree with you. Jesus did not write NT Bible, he also did not dictate it to anybody, he also did not authorize anybody to write anything on his behalf.

Thuli likes this.

Inner evidence of Gospels confirms: NT Bible is not eyewitness account

June 4, 2015

<><Thread : Did Jesus have Scribes, ie are the Gospels actual witness accounts?>

Please click the post # below.

The Deist said:
None of the gospel writers were eyewitnesses
paarsurrey said:
I agree with you. The inner evidence of the NT Bible confirms this.

Paarsurrey wrote:
Gospel According to Saint Luke
Chapter 1
[1]Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a narration of the things that have been accomplished among us;[2]According as they have delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word:[3]It seemed good to me also, having diligently attained to all things from the beginning, to write to thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,[4]That thou mayest know the verity of those words in which thou hast been instructed.​

Luke was not an eyewitness, he says so and admits it in so many words.


Popcorn likes this.

Thomas certified that Jesus did not die on the Cross

June 3, 2015

<> <Thread : Gospel of Thomas>

Please click at post # below.

Gospel of Thomas

Paarsurrey wrote:

The Church Councils canonized NT Bible unauthorized. Gospel of Thomas is no less reliable than other other gospels.

Thomas certified after the event of Crucifixion that Jesus did not die on the Cross by putting his hands in the wounds of the body of Jesus and seeing and observing with his own eyes that Jesus was in the same body as Jesus was before the crucifixion:

John 20:25
So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he said to them, “Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe.”
John 20:27
26After eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors having been shut, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace be with you.”27Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here with your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand and put it into My side; and do not be unbelieving, but believing.”​


Of being born of a virgin

May 11, 2015
Post #54

Topic of the thread :What do you think of the virgin birth of Jesus ?

Jesus was born to Mary without a father. There are/were many people who were born from the virgins in the ancient times.

Paarsurrey wrote:

Adam was born without a father or mother.


Post #57

Post #60

Paarsurrey wrote:

Well in that sense everybody is born of a virgin.
I agree with you.


Jesus not G-d

May 11, 2015 > <How can God be Jesus, and the father, yet Jesus not be the father?>

  1. Post #2
  2. Topic: How can God be Jesus, and the father, yet Jesus not be the father?

    Paarsurrey wrote:

    Jesus was never a G-d. It is a wrong notion.

    Post #4

Paarsurrey wrote:

You mean that Jesus was a manifestation of G-d like Abraham, Moses and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908? Please elaborate.


  1. Post #7

    Paarsurrey wrote:

    What do you mean by literal? Do you mean Jesus was not real?

     Post #14

Paarsurrey wrote:

All prophets/messengers of G-d like Buddha, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Socrates, Muhammad and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) being in the image of G-d were endowed this deific nature; Jesus/Esa had no distinction whatsoever in this connection.