Posts Tagged ‘Paul’s philosophy exposed’

Paul was the wolf in sheep’ clothing

November 10, 2017

Colossians* is not written by Jesus.
It is written by Paul, he did not quote from Torah, and did not mention as to what was his source of knowledge. Jesus did not claim to be a firstborn. Did he, please?
I understand from Jesus as mentioned in Gospels that Paul was the wolf in sheep’ clothing** and the false prophet** against whom Jesus warned his followers. 

Thread: “Questions: The first born of all creation? “Debating Christianity and Religion Forum Index -> Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma

Post 66: 

paarsurrey1 wrote:
Wasn’t Adam the first born, please?Regards

E–wrote:
No Christ was:

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: (including Adam) (Col:1-15)

paarsurrey1 wrote:
If Adam was not firstborn, then how did he come into existence,please?
Did Adam evolve through million years of Evolution,please?

E–wrote:

Christ created him:
For by him were all things created, (including Adam) that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: (Col 1:16)
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. (1Co 11:3)

Peace.

paarsurrey1 wrote:

Colossians* is not written by Jesus.
It is written by Paul, he did not quote from Torah, and did not mention as to what was his source of knowledge. Jesus did not claim to be a firstborn. Did he, please?
I understand from Jesus as mentioned in Gospels that Paul was the wolf in sheep’ clothing** and the false prophet** against whom Jesus warned his followers. Right, please?

Regards

_________

*Epistle to the Colossians-Authorship
“The letter’s authors claim to be Paul and Timothy, but authorship began to be authoritatively questioned during the 19th century.[9] Pauline authorship was held to by many of the early church’s prominent theologians, such as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen of Alexandria and Eusebius.[10]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Colossians

**Matthew 7:15
15 Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.

Advertisements

Canonical or Non-Canonical Catholics/Protestants sriptures : Mulsims position

March 9, 2009

Hi

We get from Wikipedia, web search “Apocrypha”:

Apocrypha (from the Greek word ἀπόκρυφα, meaning “those having been hidden away”[1]) are texts of uncertain authenticity, or writings where the authorship is questioned. When used in the specific context of Judeo-Christian theology, the term apocrypha refers to any collection of scriptural texts that falls outside the canon. Given that different denominations have different ideas about what constitutes canonical scripture, there are several different versions of the apocrypha. During sixteenth-century controversies over the biblical canon the word “apocrypha” acquired a negative connotation, and it has become a synonym for “spurious” or “false.” This usage usually involves fictitious or legendary accounts that are plausible enough to be commonly considered as truth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocryphal

Our question from the friends here is; do the CatholicsProtestants accept Apocryphal scriptures as authentic history or as inspired scriptures? If yes; why the same were not included in the NTBible?

As for us Muslims; we neither have to believe in the Canonical nor the non-canonical Catholic literature. We may believe, however, only the truth in them whether canonical or non-canonical, which is the rational, natural and logical approach, in our opinion.

Jesus neither wrote, nor dictated, nor authenticated any present Gospels whether Canonical or the non-canonical part; which were written down when Jesus was alive in India.

Muslims don’t believe in any “vision” of Paul. Jesus matters most for us Muslims. Jesus was one of the innocent Messengers, we Muslims believe; the gospel writers were only sinful persons, in our opinion, so there is no question for their being inspired or not-inspired.

Jesus being a truthful Messenger feared nobody. He was a man of wisdom also. We therefore believe anything attributed to him must consist of a straightforward claim as also reasons/wisdom of the same from Jesus.

We find both these things missing in the Catholic/Protestant Scriptures; so for all practical purposes, these are not from Jesus, in our opinion.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.

Thanks
__________________
paarsurrey – an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

P.S. I have added a page, please view on the side bar of my blog for your peaceful questions “Ask Paarsurrey” please; and you are welcome.

Jesus is neither Son of God nor God in physical/literal sense but in metaphoric sense as per usage of Bible

November 15, 2008

Our learned friend R H Kelkar, who has translated New Testament into Marathi, a language in South India, has made following observations in his write-up titled “The Meaning of ‘Nava Karar “which could be viewed in entirety at :

http://marathibible.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/the-meaning-of-nava-karar/

We only give here only one point mentioned by him:

The New Testament or ‘Nava Karar’ portrays God as a loving and forgiving father, who sent His son Jesus Christ to this world in human form with an offer of salvation for all humanity.

Paarsurrey says:

The above point is not correctly derived by him from the OTBible; and hence it is not supported by Quran- the pristine and most secure Revealed Book among the Revealed Religions and hence incorrect. God is not a physical being; He has rather created the whole physical phenomenon as He willed. Nobody shares this or other of his attributes. Hence God is nobody’s physical or literal father.

God is father of the humans in a metaphoric sense, nothing could get created without his order/will; and this is the theme of the OTBible. God has no literal wife or He needs no sex that his off-shoots are called Sons of God. This is only in the metaphoric sense otherwise it does not carry any meaning literally and physically. GodAllahYHWH needs no wife or son; this is only a phenomenon of the mortal beings and a sort of extension of life given by the Creator to one’s species. GodAllahYHWH is immortal. Quran is very clear in this aspect:

[112:1] In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[112:2] Say ‘He is Allah, the One!
[112:3] Allah the Independent and Besought of all.
[112:4] ‘He begets not, nor, is He begotten,
[112:5] And there is none like unto Him.
http://www3.alislam.org/showChapter.jsp?ch=112

We can agree with R H Kelkar if he reconciles to the above explanation.

Jesus did not pay any debt of any human beings as maintained by R H Kelkar. Jesus never died a cursed death on Cross as incorrectly invented by Paul at Rome to misguide the Christian sheep. Jesus was not a scapegoat of Paul and his associated i.e., the Catholic Church.

If anybody has any debt, he shall have to pay it himself. When Paul propounded this philosophy, Jesus was at that time traveling in India, happily among his Jewish lost sheep of which he was also a shepherd. He was never a shepherd of the Gentiles; this is a concept wrongly ascribed to Jesus; this debt Paul shall have to pay for.

OTBible Says:

Son of God

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. JOHN 3.16

A DESCRIPTIVE TERM:
And they made a proclamation in Judah and Jerusalem unto all the children of captivity. EZRA 10.7

Then said he, These are the two sons of oil, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. ZECHARIA 4.14

Behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial [satin], beset the house round about. JUDGES 19.22

The good seed are the children of the kingdom. MATTHEW 13.38

JESUS NOT THE FIRST BORN SON:

ANGELS
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan was among them. JOB 1.6 & 2:1

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy. JOB 38.7

CHILDREN OF RIGHTEOUS:
That the sons of god saw the daughters of men that they were fair. GENESIS 6.2

THE ISRAELITES:

And thou shalt say to Pharaoh. Thus said the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first born. EXODUS 4.22

And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me. EXODUS 4.23

You are the children of the Lord, your God. DEUTERONOMY 14.1

Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea. Ye are the sons of the living God. HOSEA 1.10

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/biblical/chapter_4.html

Ahmadiyya under guidance of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 Says:

• The Term “Son of God”

While the term “Son of God” has been used in reference to Jesus, it should be noted that God has used this title for many of His chosen ones.

For example, God, in the Old Testament refers to David: “I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you’” * (Psalm 2:7)

Furthermore, in a New Testament genealogy, Adam is listed as the “Son of God” (Luke 3.38).

In fact, some may argue that Adam could have a greater claim over the “Sonship of God” because, unlike Jesus, he had neither an earthly father nor mother.

In order to reconcile these references and many others, it is not unreasonable to conclude, that the Biblical usage of the term “Son of God” does not necessarily connote a literal “sonship to God” but a metaphorical one instead.

The Nature of Jesus

This metaphorical understanding is furthered by Jesus’ own words and actions. Jesus is known to have engaged in many human devotional activities such as fasting and praying. But perhaps the most significant evidence is that Jesus claimed to lack knowledge of the future because, as he claimed, only the Father possessed perfect knowledge. (Mark 13:32).

This is especially notable since Christian doctrine holds the view that Jesus’ nature is a “hypostatic union”. That is, he was “fully divine” and “fully man” at the same time. If this were true, then he should have at no point denied his own omniscience.

These, in addition to other philosophical considerations, lead one to question the biblical term “Son of God” and its literal application to Jesus.

http://www.alislam.org/topics/jesus/

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Baruch’s Conversion from a Christian to a Jew

August 7, 2008

Hi
I think it is only because the Christians follow mythical theological philosophy of Paul invented at Rome; and that they don’t follow simple teachings of Jesus that their faith is no longer rational and reasonable. The ordinary, man in the street, has not other alternative than either to become an Atheist/Agnostic or to change his religion. This is the frustration, in my opinion, of the most of the Christians of today.
I give hereunder a real story of Bruce James (Baruch Gershom) who converted from mythical Christianity of Paul to Judaism.
The Christians are requested to search for the real faith of Jesus by leaving deviant ways of Paul and returning to Jesus.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Courtesy: http://judaism.about.com/od/conversiontojudaism/a/baruch.htm

From Bruce James (Baruch Gershom) , for About.com

I wrote the following article which was published in the Baltimore Jewish Times on April 10, 1981. It has been excerpted in the book “Becoming Jewish” by Rabbi Maurice Lamm.

“You’re a convert? Gee. That’s interesting. If you don’t mind my asking, why did you do it?”

I suppose every convert to Judaism is asked the question and I’ve gotten used to it, but there is another comment I often hear that is disturbing:

“You’re a convert? There must have been a girl.”

Oy!

A lot of people just can’t believe that there is something in the Jewish religion worth having. Something that someone from the accepted, middle-class WASP world would want. So when a Jewish person makes this comment, I have to realize my patience and explain why I converted and how much value there is in being Jewish.

I doubt that my parents will ever understand why I converted. All they see now is a yarmulka on the head of a son who’s not the same person they watched grow up.

But I am the same person. Yes, I keep my head covered, pray three times a day, put on tefillin, keep a kosher home and stomach, keep Shabbos strictly, and observe other laws that, in my parents’ eyes, link me with the most fanatic and backward cult in the world. When I come home, it’s not as if their son came home, rather it’s as if they received a visit from someone from another planet.

Still, it is doubtful that I could have become an Orthodox Jew without important training I received at home.

My parents gave me a firm belief in G-d, a dedication to honesty and consistency, and a love for all people. Without these values I would have been lost in an agnostic world full of contradictions and ethical conflicts.

I was 16 when I decided to become a Jew. But even at 14 or 15 I was very religious, active in my church and giving thought to someday becoming a minister as had my great-great-grandfather. I was developing ideas that were different from standard Christian doctrine: not knowing any alternative, though, I decided to use them in a Christian context.

But all that changed one Friday night. My church confirmation class made a field trip to the synagogue in my hometown, Colorado Springs, Colorado. After the service, the rabbi stayed on and answered our questions.

One student asked if the color of the rabbi’s skullcap meant anything. No, he said. He has one to match his blue suit and others to match different articles of clothing. Another person asked him why they had somebody else (a cantor) sing the service. “Because he has a better voice than I have,” he answered quickly with a grin.

But I was cocky, and still believing that Jesus was Messiah, I baited the rabbi:

“Has the Messiah come yet?” I asked.

“No,” he said. “Look at all the suffering in the world.”

“When will he come?”

“Certainly not until we get better for him.”

“Then why should he come?”

“Exactly.”

I was stunned. Obviously, his answers to my questions were brief and over-simplified. But he hit me with one of my own theories that had no source in Christian doctrine: man plays a key role in the salvation of the world. The world is not doomed to destruction, and man may be, ultimately, perfectible.

I continued my studies of the New Testament. I was disturbed that the enlightenment of Jesus was fizzled by the narrow-minded doctrine of the Apostle Paul. Yet, when I finished my confirmation training, I was at the top of my class. On a test of Bible knowledge, the average score was 20 to 40 points. I scored an 88, double the next highest.

Then my minister asked everyone in my class to write a statement of faith. This would be used when the church elders considered our application for membership in the Presbyterian Church.

I prepared my paper with the same glee that Martin Luther must have had when he wrote his attack on the Catholic Church. First I attacked the way the Jewish ideas of Jesus had been cast away by Paul and other Church leaders and substituted with customs and values from pagan religions — often without benefit of any symbolic tie-in — all to make Christianity more marketable.

Then I attacked the dualism of Christianity. The devil got the blame for everything, I wrote with tongue in cheek, but where would Christianity be without the devil? What would motivate people to do good if not for the threat of eternal damnation?

One of the elders eventually read my piece. He told me that I had some interesting ideas. And he recommended me for membership. I couldn’t believe it. Didn’t the Church have any standards? I should have refused membership at that point. But at the time, I felt I really had no choice but to accept.

One day I just stopped going to church. But that didn’t send me to the synagogue. I didn’t know anything about Judaism. But I did know that I didn’t like the way Christianity had developed. In my mind, what had begun as a Jewish cult, in a short time, became a religion that preached love and fought wars.

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.

Jesus is not a scapegoat of Paul’s sins

July 17, 2008

R H Kelkar Says:

Our learned friend R H Kelkar, who has translated New Testament into Marathi, a language in South India, has made following observations in his write-up titled “The Meaning of ‘Nava Karar “which could be viewed in entirety at : http://marathibible.wordpress.com/2008/07/16/the-meaning-of-nava-karar/

We only give salient points from his observations:

1. God had prescribed laws for His people. Those who followed them enjoyed privileges and God’s protection, and those who disobeyed the laws incurred punishment and God’s wrath.

2. The New Testament or ‘Nava Karar’ portrays God as a loving and forgiving father, who sent His son Jesus Christ to this world in human form with an offer of salvation for all humanity.

3. The price of our salvation has been paid on our behalf by Jesus Christ.

Paarsurrey comments:

We agree with his first point which is, in my opinion, the theme of OTBible and is correct as it agrees with Quran the Holy and the most secure Word of GodAllahYHWH.

The second point is not correctly derived by him from the OTBible or fom his first observation; hence it is not supported by Quran and hence incorrect. God is not a physical being, He has rather created the whole physical phenomenon as He willed. Nobody shares this or other of his attributes. Hence God is nobody’s physical or literal father. God is father of the humans in a metaphorics sense, nothing could get created without his order/will, this is the theme of the OTBible. God has no literal wife or He needs no sex that his off-shoots are called Sons of God. This is only in the metaphoric sense otherwise it carries not meaning literally and physically. GodAllahYHWH needs no wife or son; this is only a phenomenon of the mortal being and a sort of extension of life given by the Creator to one’s species. GodAllahYHWH is immortal. Quran is very clear in this aspect:
[112:1] In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful.
[112:2] Say ‘He is Allah, the One!
[112:3] Allah the Independent and Besought of all.
[112:4] ‘He begets not, nor, is He begotten,
[112:5] And there is none like unto Him.
http://www3.alislam.org/showChapter.jsp?ch=112

We can agree with him if he reconciles to the above explanation.
Since the second point is not derived by him, the third one is most faulty, in my opinion.

Jesus did not pay any debt of any human beings; he never died a cursed death on Cross as incorrectly invented by Paul at Rome to misguide the Christian sheep. Jesus was not scapegoat. If anybody has any debt, he shall have to pay it himself. When Paul propounded this philosophy, Jesus was travelling in India, happily among his Jewish lost sheep of whom he was also a shepherd. He was never a shephered of the Gentiles, this is a concept wrongly ascribed to Jesus; this debt Paul shall have to pay for.

OTBible Says:

Son of God
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. JOHN 3.16
A DESCRIPTIVE TERM:
And they made a proclamation in Judah and Jerusalem unto all the children of captivity. EZRA 10.7
Then said he, These are the two sons of oil, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth. ZECHARIA 4.14
Behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial [satin], beset the house round about. JUDGES 19.22
The good seed are the children of the kingdom. MATTHEW 13.38
JESUS NOT THE FIRST BORN SON:
ANGELS
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and satan was among them. JOB 1.6 & 2:1
When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy. JOB 38.7
CHILDREN OF RIGHTEOUS:
That the sons of god saw the daughters of men that they were fair. GENESIS 6.2
THE ISRAELITES:
And thou shalt say to Pharaoh. Thus said the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first born. EXODUS 4.22
And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me. EXODUS 4.23
You are the children of the Lord, your God. DEUTERONOMY 14.1
Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea. Ye are the sons of the living God. HOSEA 1.10
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/biblical/chapter_4.html

Ahmadiyya under guidance of the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 Says:

• The Term “Son of God”
While the term “Son of God” has been used in reference to Jesus, it should be noted that God has used this title for many of His chosen ones.

For example, God, in the Old Testament refers to David: “I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you'” * (Psalm 2:7)

Furthermore, in a New Testament genealogy, Adam is listed as the “Son of God” (Luke 3.38). In fact, some may argue that Adam could have a greater claim over the “Sonship of God” because, unlike Jesus, he had neither an earthly father nor mother.

In order to reconcile these references and many others, it is not unreasonable to conclude, that the Biblical usage of the term “Son of God” does not necessarily connote a literal “sonship to God” but a metaphorical one instead.

The Nature of Jesus

This metaphorical understanding is furthered by Jesus’ own words and actions. Jesus is known to have engaged in many human devotional activities such as fasting and praying. But perhaps the most significant evidence is that Jesus claimed to lack knowledge of the future because, as he claimed, only the Father possessed perfect knowledge. (Mark 13:32).

This is especially notable since Christian doctrine holds the view that Jesus’ nature is a “hypostatic union”. That is, he was “fully divine” and “fully man” at the same time. If this were true, then he should have at no point denied his own omniscience.

These, in addition to other philosophical considerations, lead one to question the biblical term “Son of God” and its literal application to Jesus.
http://www.alislam.org/topics/jesus/

while Jesus healed others, this preparation “ointment of Jesus” healed Jesus!

July 15, 2008

j2nice78 Says:
July 15, 2008 at 4:57 pm

“Let me be 100% clear here. I do not believe what the bible says just because it says it. I believe it because I have evaluated the evidence and have found it to consistent with what is contained in the bible.
Every religious writing in the world makes truth claims, that is why you have to look at evidence rather than just religious writings.
“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.” – Albert Einstein
I am a God-fearing peaceful Christian”
“3. Let’s assume everyone was wrong and Jesus was alive when he went into the tomb, how on earth would a man who was so badly injured and bleeding still be alive thirty-six hours later? He would have bled to death.”

Paarsurrey Says:
Hi peaceful Christian!

First I would like to say, please don’t mind my opinion, that this is only a story or a mythical theological philosophy invented by Paul at Rome that Jesus died on the Cross. His entire philosophy is woven on this sigle point, to which he allured the Christians. Paul was not a witness to the event of crucifixion but he was smart at imagination; in any case this is not Word of revelation from the mouth of GodAllahYHWH and hence it should be seen in that perspective. A myth cannot be tested in a scientific lab, it has to be analysed systematically.

If a man is badly injured, and a good medicine is immediately available and the man is treated well; no wonders one gets cured. Please go to a hospital and see for yourself.It daily happens.
It is ointment of Jesus and Jesus’ prayers at the garden that healed injuries inflicted on Jesus on Cross.

Please don’t take it personally; we are just searching for truth.

Thanks

PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 Says:

On the evidence derived from books of medicine

A piece of evidence of great value with regard to the escape of Jesus from the Cross, which no one can help admitting, is a medical preparation known as Marham-i-Isa or the ‘Ointment of Jesus’ recorded in hundreds of medical books. Some of these books were compiled by Christians, some by Magians or Jews, some by Muslims. Most of them are very old. Investigations show that in the beginning the preparation came to be known as an oral tradition among hundreds of thousands of people. Then they recorded it.

At first, in the very time of Jesus, a little after the event of the Cross, a pharmaceutical work was compiled in Latin, in which there was a mention of this preparation along with the statement that the preparation had been prepared for the wounds of Jesus. Next, this work was translated into several languages, until, in the time of Mamun-al-Rashid, it was translated into Arabic.

It is, moreover, a strange result of divine intervention that eminent physicians of all religions — Christian, Jew, Magian, or Muslim — have all mentioned this preparation in their books, and have stated that it was prepared for Jesus by the disciples. A study of books on pharmacology shows that this preparation is very useful in cases of injuries due to blows or falls, arresting immediately the flow of blood; and as it also contains ‘myrrh’ the wound remains aseptic.

The ointment is also useful in plague; it is good for boils and ulcers of all kinds. It is, however, not clear whether the ointment was prepared, as a result of divine revelation, by Jesus himself after he had undergone the suffering of the Cross, or, that it was prepared after consultation with some physician. Some of its ingredients are like specifics; especially ‘myrrh’ which is mentioned also in the Torah. In any case, the wounds of Jesus healed up in a few days by the use of this ointment. Within three days he recovered sufficiently to be able to march seventy miles on foot from Jerusalem to Galilee. Hence, regarding the efficacy of this preparation it is enough to say that while Jesus healed others, this preparation healed Jesus!

The Books which record this fact number more than one thousand. To mention them all would be too long. As, moreover, the prescription is a famous one among the Yunani (i.e., those versed in ancient Greek medicine) physicians, I do not see any need to state the titles of all these books: I set down below the titles of only a few which are available here.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch3.html
Unquote

I leave it open for the viewers to investigate and to see through the truth in the above.
Please feel free to comment for peaceful discussion and searching for the truth only.

I love Jesus, Mary and Muhammad.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Breathing difficulties of Jesus on Cross discussed

July 15, 2008

Stephen Bedard Says:
July 15, 2008 at 12:49 pm

The problem with that is that it is impossible to only seem dead during a crucifixion. In order to breathe, one must lift their body up. The way a person dies during crucifixion is that they are so exhausted they can no longer lift themselves up and they suffocate. So if Jesus passed out or even pretended to be dead, he would really be dead in just a few minutes.


paarsurrey
Says:
July 15, 2008 at 3:20 pm

Hi Stephen Bedard!
I respect your opinion but I can’t agree with you for reasons.
Jesus was not the only person put on Cross; there were two other persons mentioned in the NTBible, perhaps of more age than Jesus. They all suffered the same kind of treatment on the Cross. They had the same kind of difficulty of breathing if any on the Cross; yet they only died for sure when their legs were broken.
On a pretex Jesus’ legs were not broken, perhaps there was some sort of hidden collabration between the friends of Jesus, in my opinion, and the Pilate or the Roman officials. You know Pilate exclaimed with surprise that Jesus had died so soon.
I love Jesus and hence would love to see him survive against all odds. Paul was an enemy of Jesus so he invented a story at Rome that Jesus died a cursed or sinful death on Cross.
Jesus was then alive and in self-exile in India. Jesus did not die on Cross, he survived and died a peaceful and natural death in India, at some point in the history.

Please don’t mind; we are searching of truth.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful person

PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 Says:

Apart from this, it was necessary that he should escape death on the cross, for it was stated in the Holy Book that whoever was hanged on the wood was accursed. It is a cruel and an unjust blasphemy to attribute a curse to an eminent person like Jesus, the Messiah, for, according to the agreed view of all who know the language, la’nat, or curse, has reference to the state of one’s heart. A man would be said to be accursed when his heart, having been estranged from God, becomes really dark; when, deprived of divine mercy and of divine love, devoid absolutely of His Knowledge, blinded like the devil, he becomes filled with the poison of unbelief; when there remains not a ray of divine love and knowledge in him; when the bond of loyalty is broken, and between him and God there arises hatred and contempt and spite and hostility, so much so that God and he become mutual enemies; and when God becomes weary of him and he becomes weary of God; in short, when he becomes an heir to all the attributes of the Devil — and that is why the Devil himself is called accursed.
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch1.html

Ointment of Jesus healed injuries inflicted on Jesus on Cross

July 15, 2008

Scott Thong Says:
July 11, 08

“I do not know where you got your information from, but I contend that it is inferior to the logic and proof of my arguments.”
“6) Even if Jesus was not 100% dead, the burial treatment would kill Him – 100 pounds of spices and preservatives were put into His open wounds, then His body was tightly wrapped like an Egyptian mummy!”

Paarsurrey Says:

In my opinion the source lies in the deep study of NTBible, only the PromisedMessiah 1838-1908, has by his logical arguments exposed the mythical philosophy of Paul. One finds no tradition of such exhorbitant amount of herbal fragrances applied on the dead body of a person. This was done by Nicodemus, a physician and his companions who were friends of Jesus. They were smart enough not to bury Jesus in a grave as they knew he was alive lest he get suffocated, so they laid him in spacious tomb and applied the herbs for treatment of Jesus. When Jesus got cured of his injuries inflicted on him on the Cross, they helped him to unwrap the coverings and to get out of the tomb.They were the “angels” who were seen by the women, in my opinion.

PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 Says:

On the evidence derived from books of medicine

A piece of evidence of great value with regard to the escape of Jesus from the Cross, which no one can help admitting, is a medical preparation known as Marham-i-Isa or the ‘Ointment of Jesus’ recorded in hundreds of medical books. Some of these books were compiled by Christians, some by Magians or Jews, some by Muslims. Most of them are very old. Investigations show that in the beginning the preparation came to be known as an oral tradition among hundreds of thousands of people. Then they recorded it.

At first, in the very time of Jesus, a little after the event of the Cross, a pharmaceutical work was compiled in Latin, in which there was a mention of this preparation along with the statement that the preparation had been prepared for the wounds of Jesus. Next, this work was translated into several languages, until, in the time of Mamun-al-Rashid, it was translated into Arabic.

It is, moreover, a strange result of divine intervention that eminent physicians of all religions — Christian, Jew, Magian, or Muslim — have all mentioned this preparation in their books, and have stated that it was prepared for Jesus by the disciples. A study of books on pharmacology shows that this preparation is very useful in cases of injuries due to blows or falls, arresting immediately the flow of blood; and as it also contains ‘myrrh’ the wound remains aseptic.

The ointment is also useful in plague; it is good for boils and ulcers of all kinds. It is, however, not clear whether the ointment was prepared, as a result of divine revelation, by Jesus himself after he had undergone the suffering of the Cross, or, that it was prepared after consultation with some physician. Some of its ingredients are like specifics; especially ‘myrrh’ which is mentioned also in the Torah. In any case, the wounds of Jesus healed up in a few days by the use of this ointment. Within three days he recovered sufficiently to be able to march seventy miles on foot from Jerusalem to Galilee. Hence, regarding the efficacy of this preparation it is enough to say that while Jesus healed others, this preparation healed Jesus!

The Books which record this fact number more than one thousand. To mention them all would be too long. As, moreover, the prescription is a famous one among the Yunani (i.e., those versed in ancient Greek medicine) physicians, I do not see any need to state the titles of all these books: I set down below the titles of only a few which are available here.

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/jesus-in-india/ch3.html

I leave it open for the viewers to investigate and to see through the truth in the above.

Please feel free to comment for peaceful discussion and searching for the truth only.

I love Jesus, Mary and Muhammad.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim