Islam the Opposite

[Nottheworld]

Let me see if I understand this. Christians, the Qur'an says, are suppose to stand fast to the word of God, the law, the gospel, and revelation, except all the parts Muslims say were added later and don't agree with one man in a cave all by himself. That sure does sound a lot like Mormons. Mormons say the Bible is true only insofar as the book of Mormon says so by one man. It's always one guy who starts it up. Funny.

Personally, I think Jesus was the wisest of us all when He said just kick the dust under our feet and don't concern ourselves with people who could care less, e.g. Muslims and Mormons. Look, if they had a heart for the truth they would be a little more receptive than they are.

[PeteWaldo]

Let me see if I understand this. Christians, the Qur'an says, are suppose to stand fast to the word of God, the law, the gospel, and revelation, except all the parts Muslims say were added later and don't agree with one man in a cave all by himself.

No the Quran says just what I quoted. Where in the Quran do you find any ability for a Muslim to say other than the verses above allow?

That sure does sound a lot like Mormons. Mormons say the Bible is true only insofar as the book of Mormon says so by one man. It's always one guy who starts it up. Funny.

Just as we were warned

Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

The 19th century alone brought us

Mary Baker Eddy - Christian Science
Joseph Smith - LDS Mormon
Charles Taze Russell - Jehovah's Witness
William Miller - Millerites associated into SDA
Ellen White - SDA Seventh Day Adventists
Edward Irving - Irvingites
John Nelson Darby - dispensationalism
Westcott and Hort - wrote corrupt 19th century minority Greek text that is the basis of the majority of modern bible versions.
Madame Blavatsky - Theosophical Society - satanist acquaintence of Westcott and Hort

2 Timothy 4:3-4 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away [their] ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Personally, I think Jesus was the wisest of us all when He said just kick the dust under our feet and don't concern ourselves with people who could care less, e.g. Muslims and Mormons. Look, if they had a heart for the truth they would be a little more receptive than they are.

But how can they receive it if it hasn't been shown to them?
Everything most Muslims know about Christianity has been taught to them by their imams.
Trust me, they are surprised and then get pretty hot when you inform them they are antichrists, through scripture. Lying Greek sophist styled entertainers like Ahmed Deedat even created his own bible verse to deceive them into believing they are not antichrist.

[Nottheworld]

Of course, you should go through the word of God with them, spend time reading it with them showing what it really says. That's really the only solution to show how what they assumed was not true. But after you have done a pretty good job of explaining everything and still not response. You got to kick the dust under your feet and move onto the next Muslim to see if he hath an ear to hear.

What did I say that you thought was more than what the Qur'an said for the Muslim?

Darby was correct. Why are you offended by dispensations of time? Surely you don't think the age of grace was the same as the age under the law?

There is the Abrahamic Covenant, the Old Covenant of the Law with the nation of Israel, and the New Covenant in the dispensation of grace. There are several covenants below these major ones.

Age of (eah with its unique characteristics or dispensation):
1. Innocence - Adam
2. Conscience - After man sinned, up to the flood
3. Government - After the flood, man allowed to eat meat, death penalty instituted
4. Promise - Abraham up to Moses and the giving of the Law
5. Law - Moses to the cross
6. Grace - The cross to the Millennial Kingdom
7. Millennial Kingdom - A 1000 year reign of Christ on earth centered in Jerusalem

Just looking at your profile, you don't agree with the premillennial view which shows you are don't accept sound doctrine. How are you any different?

[PeteWaldo]

Of course, you should go through the word of God with them, spend time reading it with them showing what it really says. That's really the only solution to show how what they assumed was not true. But after you have done a pretty good job of explaining everything and still not response. You got to kick the dust under your feet and move onto the next Muslim to see if he hath an ear to hear.

What did I say that you thought was more than what the Qur'an said for the Muslim?

"...except all the parts Muslims say were added later and don't agree with one man in a cave all by himself."

I thought you were crediting the Quran with being the reason modern Muslims suggest that the bible was corrupt, or parts added later, etc.
But the claim of bible cannot be supported by the Quran. Another of Mohammed's oxymorons.

[Nottheworld]

Of course the Qur'an is irrelevant six centuries later.

But Muslims do claim, say, the parts about the Trinity were added later; that is the only explanation to resolve contradictions between the Bible and the Qur'an. Those are the true Muslims who take that approach. Based on the Qur'an, you can make from the perspective of a Muslim a case for not accepting all chapters of all 66 books by saying parts revealed by Allah hath revealed therein Jesus didn't die on the cross and God is not Triune.

sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

[PeteWaldo]

Of course, you should go through the word of God with them, spend time reading it with them showing what it really says.

Is this a vital part of the focus of your church's ministry? Bringing the Gospel to that 1/4 of mankind?
If it is, it is pretty unique.
I see 1.5 billion people headed for the lake of fire, in sight of a church that appears more despondent and defensive, more than anything else.

[Nottheworld]

The problem is you are deceiving Muslims, because you are leading them from Allah to a false Christ who does not return to Earth and reign for the 1000 years with the saints (Jude 14,15). Revelation 20 follows the return of Christ (Revelation 19) and after the 1000 years is the finishing up of things at the end of the thousand years (latter part of Revelation 20). then the New City (chapter 21) takes place on the New Earth. So when Jesus returns to reign on Earth you will reject Him, because you are looking for something else, the Antichrist. You need to get yourself right before God before helping Muslims. Since you claim the False Prophet already came, you will be deceived by the Antichrist coming out of revived Rome and his False Prophet.

[PeteWaldo]

The problem is you are deceiving Muslims, because you are leading them from Allah to a false Christ who does not return to Earth and reign for the 1000 years with the saints (Jude 14,15).

I don't teach one way or the other in regard to the millennial reign.
But if you believe that salvation is dependent on one's interpretation of a single verse, contained in the figurative language of a prophetic vision, from which springs your "definite" doctrine, based on an indefinite plural, you are actually suggesting your own unregenerate nature.

Revelation 20 follows the return of Christ (Revelation 19) and after the 1000 years is the finishing up of things at the end of the thousand years (latter part of Revelation 20). then the New City (chapter 21) takes place on the New Earth. So when Jesus returns to reign on Earth you will reject Him, because you are looking for something else, the Antichrist. You need to get yourself right before God before helping Muslims. Since you claim the False Prophet already came, you will be deceived by the Antichrist coming out of revived Rome and his False Prophet.

Everyone in this forum failed to make a case for a single antichrist based on the verses that actually contain the term. But hey, what does the Word of God matter when one has his doctrine to defend!
It is the 20th century church that blinded itself to the fact that 1/4 of the world are antichrists as a result of following Mohammedanism that is the exact opposite of Christianity.

[Nottheworld]

What makes you think there is only one verse proving the millennial reign of Christ on earth? And what is that verse by the way? I don't understand how you can keep contending 1260 days are really years when Jesus would have returned in 1948 if you were right. Nothing happened in the 1290th which would have been 1978. 1335th would be 2023. Nonsense! The 1290th day is 30 days of judgment by Jesus when He is on earth. The 1335th day is 45 more days to set Israel up as the center of all nations.

What indefinite plural are you talking about? And why don't you believe God's word is "definite"? Are you a relativist?

The language of prophecy is not figurative, but specific, exacting and precise. Take for example the book of Revelation. There are 30 or so symbols, but half of them are explained right there in the text. So in 22 chapters that is less than 1 unexplained symbol every two chapters. That can hardly be construed as figurative language. The other half are relatively simple enough to discern from other parts of the Bible.

You accused me of being an unregenerate because Jesus said He is returning in Person to reign for the 1000 years (Zech. 14.4, Acts 1.11, Jude 14,15, Rev. 1.7, chapter 19.11-16, 20.2-7)? It would seem to me your accusing the saints (Rev. 12.10), therefore, you are following Satan, so you would be unregenerate?

The Antichrist described in Revelation 13, I gave you a lengthy post under in Roman Church forums, which you didn't respond to at all, so the burden of the proof remains on you to challenge it. Furthermore, you admit if the Antichrist is true you will clearly be deceived because you wouldn't even accept him when he arrives since you don't think he exists.

You are blinded by the fact not just 1/4 of the world are antichrists because they are Muslims, but almost everyone else is antichrist too including the vast bulk of Christendom who actually worship a false Christ. You are antichrist, because you reject the Christ and accept Antichrist who you admit if he comes on the scene since you deny his existence, you will not discern him and his deception.

Since you are a follower of Antichrist, then you are not a Christian.

[PeteWaldo]

What makes you think there is only one verse proving the millennial reign of Christ on earth? And what is that verse by the way? I don't understand how you can keep contending 1260 days are really years when Jesus would have returned in 1948 if you were right.

You mean is that as you try to wring a single concept through the filter of your doctrine that's how it looks to you. This is why I included several threads in the forum to try begin to introduce a broader picture of this continuous historic context, because it needs to be considered on the basis of it's own merits, in total, and will never be seen if one insists on taking pieces of it and testing them individually against preconceived notions.

I believe 1948 marked the beginning of what Daniel referred to as the "time of the end", and thus when his prophecies began to be unsealed. For example -

Daniel 10:1 In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [was] true, but the time appointed [was] long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.

"The time appointed was long...".
You can Yahoo a supportable date of the first year of Cyrus in Babylon to be 536 BC (making the third year of Cyrus 533 BC)

Toward the end of his prophecy we read:

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which [was] upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that [it shall be] for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these [things] shall be finished.

Jews - both Messianic and non-Messianic - translation of the Hebrew idiom "time, times and an half" is somewhat different than most of us Christians may have been taught. Let's suppose for a moment, just for the sake of argument, that Jewish scholars just may happen to have a better understanding of antiquated Hebrew idioms, than church scholars do.

Below is the above verse from a version of the Tanach:

Daniel 12:7 And I heard the man clad in linen, who was above the waters of the river, and he raised his right hand and his left hand to the heavens, and he swore by the Life of the world, that in the time of [two] times and a half, and when they have ended shattering the strength of the holy people, all these will end.

While Daniel's prophecies use this "times" idiom, the Old Testament never defines it. However, most Christians are familiar with the following verse from the New Testament:

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

The Greek word that is translated as "day" in the above verse is "hemera". This is an ambiguous word whose definition is determined by it's context.
In 3 other passages in the KJV it is translated as "time" (in 12 verses in the NASB).

From Strong's:
New Testament Greek Definition:
2250 hemera {hay-mer'-ah}
from (with 5610 implied) of a derivative of hemai (to sit,
akin to the base of 1476) meaning tame, i.e. gentle;
TDNT - 2:943,309; n f
AV - day 355, daily + 2596 15, time 3, not tr 2, misc 14; 389

So what happens if we ponder for a moment as to whether the Lord may have meant for a "time" to be as a thousand years:

2-1/2 "times" would equal 2500 years. Then 2500 - 533 = 1967. The restoration of the Jews to, and end of the Gentile control of, Jerusalem. Note it in the context of the above verse. The end of the "shattering the strength of the holy people". As Daniel wrote, the Jews were the only "holy people". In 1967 the completion of the restoration of their power and strength occurred when they took Jerusalem.

Do you find that interesting?