Posts Tagged ‘theological Philosophy of Paul’

People disenchanted and disillusioned with Jesus being God

April 30, 2009

fgenej11 says:

I’m sure you’ve heard this before but I wouldn’t want you to stand before Him and say that I did not tell you the truth. Thanks for your time.

Paarsurrey says:

Hi friend fgenej11

It is true that I did heard about it before, but there are many denominations of the Christians, about 32000+ of them, and all in confusion and nothing with certainty. The ingenuity of sinful Paul is now fading out. The present generation of Americans and the people in the West, due to their being research oriented, and not ready to accept everything blindfolded from the Church, have become wise not to accept anything unless supported by reason, rationality and logical arguments. The people have simply become disenchanted and disillusioned with the Jesus being God; how could they accept a poor man made god only by the whims of the cunning Paul and the sinful scribes?

They are now joining Atheism or Agnosticism in large numbers from their present Catholicism or Protestantism, just two sides of a single coin. You may if you like to access:
“Busted Review: Quitting Church
Why the Faithful are Fleeing and What to Do about It. by Julia Duin.

Or the link
April 28 2009 > Americans changing faith more and quicker.

Following points of the Pew Forum study are noteworthy:

1. Catholics are much more likely to cite concerns about their religion as a reason for leaving.

2. Drop out of institutional religion altogether

3. People are more disenchanted with institutionalized religion than with the idea of God.

4. “Among Catholics, there is much less scope for mobility within the denomination, and a larger number ended up leaving.”

I appreciate your gesture to informing me your stance in the post. I think it is time you should also review your understanding of your faith, which is not truth and not even held by Jesus and Mary to start with. How could you afford to believe the Theological Philosophy of Paul under the misnomer of Christianity while it was never ever believed by Jesus and or Mary?

Jesus of Bible has got no relevance with the present era; that is why God Allah YHWH has graceful sent Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 in this era as the Second Coming to instill the true faith of Jesus as mentioned in Quran.

I respect your faith.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim


Baruch’s Conversion from a Christian to a Jew

August 7, 2008

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.


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim


From Bruce James (Baruch Gershom) , for

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.”


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?”


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.

Elijah was to descend from the heavens with his chariot before coming of Jesus

July 13, 2008

DT Says:
July 13, 2008 at 1:44 am

Admittedly I know very little of your particular brand of Islam, paarsurrey, but that doesn’t keep me from saying it is a false religion, for any sect led by a man called the Promised Messiah, who isn’t Jesus of Nazareth, goes against the Bible which I believe to be God’s Word. It seems that you, in typical Islamic fashion, pick and choose which scriptures of the Bible to believe. Would you say that anything that contradicts your assumptions, fo example the scriptures TJ pointed out speak of Christ’s literal death, are simply evidence of corruption? That’s the current mainstream Muslim apologetic approach. Perhaps yours is different.

Anyway, we appreciate this dialogue. As TJ said, perhaps we’ll post on this topic soon. Thank you.

paarsurrey Says:
July 13, 2008 at 10:19 am
Hi DT!
I appreciate your comments. You know that Jesus used to talk in parables; hence in my opinion those who wan to take his Second Coming as physical and literal don’t understand him and his person fully. Perhaps they are the ones who take things arbitrarily; especially the things he had himself explained.
Jews believed in the Second Coming of Elijah before advent of Jesus; and one should not forget that Jesus and Mary were Jews and the were followers of Moses. Elijaj was the person who went to skies alongwith his Chariot and horses to skies; the Jews believed in this. Jews waited for the descent of Elijah from the skies before Jesus’ arrival. They asked this question from Jesus and he replied that John the Baptist was the Elijah; of course not physically and literally, but metaphorically.

In this is the reply of Seond Coming of Jesus. I love Jesus and therefore I would side with Jesus instead of siding with Paul who wanted to take it physically and literally. Paul does not follow Jesus in the guidance Jesus provided in this connection. I don’t think the Christians are correct in believing such mythical concepts. This way they only become irrational whereas Jesus was a rational person.
This is my opinion; one may differ with it but with reasons.


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim.

Jesus not an accursed person – a sinner as held by Paul

July 13, 2008

Job Says:

July 12, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Jesus Christ’s crucifixion has been independently verified by documents from the Roman Empire as well as the Jewish (NOT CHRISTIAN!) historian Flavius Josephus. Paul was not even in Jerusalem when Jesus Christ was crucified, and he may not have even been alive. The Bible narratives of the crucifixion of Jesus Christ come from Matthew and John (two eyewitnesses), Mark (who traveled with the eyewitness Peter), and Luke (who spoke with other eyewitnesses). Claiming that Paul invented the death of Jesus Christ on the cross is a statement totally inconsistent with not only the New Testament but independently verified and documented history. And as for the significance of Jesus Christ’s death – an innocent man who was God in the flesh dying in place of the guilty as a sin offering as described in Leviticus, and incidentally Barabbas took the place of the scapegoat – was not invented by Paul, but rather described in John, Matthew, Luke, and the other gospels.

The “Christianity was invented by Paul” notion is a common one of modern times, but it does not stand up to theological or historical scrutiny. In order for it to be true, Paul would have had to have written the entire New Testament rather than merely the books attributed to him.

Job Says:

July 12, 2008 at 9:29 pm

Further, for Paul to have invented Christianity, the independent historical documents from Roman and Jewish sources would have had to have been frauds as well.

paarsurrey Says:

July 13, 2008 at 2:09 am edit


I respect your opinion and faith; yet I don’t agree with you. In my opinion, Paul had contradictory concepts; one one hand he teaches that Jesus was an innocent person while on the other hand Paul’s theological philosophy is based on an accursed Jesus, which makes Jesus a wrong doer and disobedient person. I love Jesus and Mary; instead of believing mythically that Jesus was an accursed person, I would rather leave Paul and I would side with Jesus.

There is no harm in improving upon the cocepts propounded by Paul and make corrections in them to make them aligned with the simple concepts of Jesus based on OTBible, afterall Jesus and Mary were good Jews, a follower of Moses.


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

The myth (not the miracle) of Jesus dying on Cross

July 11, 2008

One may find the following discussion interesting on the issue of Jesus’ death on Cross or his not dying on it.

Scott Thong Says:

July 11, 08 at vide and concludes:
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.

paarsurrey Says: The comment is awaiting moderation.
July 11, 08


I respect your faith.

I have read the write-up as contained in ( the whole of it. In my opinion there is a difference between a myth and a miracle. One cannot understand a phenomenon fully unless one compares it with others writing on the subject.The PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 has explained it in detail with very sound arguments. Kindly read his book “Jesus in India” , written a hundred years ago and compare it with your views and you will know the truth for sure. It only requires a little research.
The book “Jesus in India” can be accessed here freely:

Kindly read the book so that we could discuss it further. There is no harm if other persons reading our posts join in the discussion. Jesus did not die a cursed death on Cross; he was a righteous person, I love him.

The myth (not the miracle) of Jesus dying on Cross was invented by Paul at Rome, when Jesus was in exile and alive in India. There is no mystery; if there was any, that has been solved by the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 with a Word of revelation from GodAllahYHWH.


I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Jesus was no sinner – an accursed person as held by Paul

July 5, 2008

First I would like to copy/paste here a post from our friend Justin and my response to him.Please don’t mind it. It is only in search for truth; else I respect the Christian religion and I love Jesus and Mary.

1. Justin Says:
July 4, 2008 at 4:33 pm edit
Islam will provide no shelter for you as a sinner. Have you ever told a lie, stolen something, or looked with lust? Then you would be guilty. See to take the “Good Test”. Perhaps you could ever write a blog post about this test and what you think.

2. paarsurrey Says:
July 5, 2008 at 12:00 am edit
I admit, even witout writing this test, that I am a sinner. My question is who prepared this test and similiar other tests I have seen? Did Jesus prepare this test for the sinners? I don’t think he prepared it for me or you. If you are not a sinner; I congratulate you, I am not jealous of you. Now what should a sinner like me do or an innocent person like you should do? Kindly quote from Quran, OTBible or NTBible separately in this connection. The cure from sin is very important, I do agree with you.
Please don’t mind.
I love Moses, Jesus, Mary and Muhammad.
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

While my friend has asked me to write a blogpost on sins.

My humble submission is that it is Paul who invented the theological philosophy that Jesus was an accursed person- a sinner, who died on Cross, for the atonement of the sins of the CatholicsProtestants and other Christians; never realizing the inner obvious contradictions lying hidden under this doctrine. Jesus would never say such a thing; it is a pure sinful imagination of Paul in my opinion. The sins of a person have no direct relationship with dieing of another person.

This was a cocept of the Christians for centuries; till such time that the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 pointed it out and rescued Jesus from it and proved that Jesus never died on Cross and he could not die as Jesus was an innocent person, not an accursed person who would have died on Cross. I give hereunder an argument given by him for the benefit of our Christian friends and brothers:

“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.

It is clear that the significance of the word Mal’un, viz. accursed, is so foul that it can never apply to any righteous person who entertains love of God in his heart. Alas! Christians did not ponder over the significance of a curse when they invented this belief; else, it were impossible for them to have used such a bad word for a righteous man like Jesus. Can we say that Jesus’ heart was ever really estranged from God; that he had denied God, that he hated Him and had become His enemy? Can we ever think that Jesus had ever felt in his heart that he was estranged from God, that he was an enemy of God, and that he was immersed in the darkness of unbelief and denial? If, then, Jesus had never been in such a state of mind, that his heart was always full of love and the light of Divine Knowledge, is it for you, wise people, to ponder whether we can ever say that, not one, but thousands of curses from God had descended upon the heart of Jesus with all their evil significance? Never.

Then, how can we say that he was, God forbid, accursed? It is a pity that once a man has given utterance to something, when he has taken his stand upon a particular belief, he is not inclined to give up that belief, however much the absurdity thereof be exposed. Desire to attain salvation, if grounded upon true foundations, is a praiseworthy thing, but where is the sense in having a desire for salvation which kills truth and which countenances, regarding a holy prophet arid a perfect man, the belief that he had as it were passed through a state in which he had been estranged from God, and in which, instead of unity of heart and unity of inclination, there had been produced a strangeness and aloofness, enmity and hatred; and, instead of light, darkness had surrounded his heart?

Let it also be noticed that this not only detracts from the prophethood and apostleship of Jesus (on whom be the peace of God) but it is also derogatory to his claim to spiritual eminence, holiness, love, and knowledge of God, to which he has repeatedly given expression in the gospels.

Just look through the Bible; therein Jesus clearly claims that he is the Light of the world, that he is the Guide, and that he stands in a relation of great love towards God; that he has been honoured by a clean birth, and that he is the loved Son of God. How then, in spite of these pure and holy relations, can a curse, with all its significance, be attributed to Jesus? No, never.

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.”

Free Advertising

var sid = ‘31497’;
var title_color = ‘000000’;
var description_color = ‘646360’;
var link_color = ‘7FBE00’;
var background_color = ‘FFFFFF’;
var border_color = ‘646360’;

All sins are forgivable – Established by Moses, Jesus and Muhammad

June 17, 2008


June 17, 2008 at 8:26 am

Ahmadi, thanks for your comments again. Could you look back over my post and answer the questions that I posed you?

June 17, 2008 at 9:56 am

Quote from your Post:
One initial question for you though – you used the phrase “imaginary sins” in your post – do you propose that there is no such thing as sin?

Hi Victor, my friend!


I don’t mean that there are/were no sins.


In my opinion the sins are forgiven by GodAllahYHWH when a sinner repents over his mistakes, asks forgiveness from GodAllahYHWH and resolves not to do it again. If God forgives the sins then it is as if no sins were committed altogether.

This is established from OTBible, Moses and Jesus. Quran also spports it and confirms it:


[39:54] Say, ‘O My servants who have sinned against their souls, despair not of the mercy of Allah, surely, Allah forgives all sins. Verily, He is Most forgiving, Ever Merciful;
[39:55] ‘And turn to your Lord, and submit yourselves to Him, before there comes unto you the punishment; for then you shall not be helped;
[39:56] And follow the best Teaching that has been revealed to you from your Lord, before the punishment comes upon you suddenly, while you perceive not.’
[39:57] Lest a soul should say, ‘O woe is me in that I neglected my duty in respect of Allah! Surely, I was among the scoffers.’


It was Paul who invented his theological philosophy on imaginary sins; which has nothing to do with OTBible or Moses, Jesus ,Quran and Muhammad.


I love Jesus, Mary and Muhammad.




I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim