Jesus praying for Muslims in the Bible!

Let's have the whole quote in context Ahmad:-

Why had the title 'Lord' been used?
The quoted reference continues:-

So the expression 'The Lord' is in fact incorrectly used when refering to the personal name of God, for it is a title, not a name and its use was discontinued by the Jews on the mistaken grounds that it should not be utterred.
The personal name of God is YHWH in Hebrew, pronounced not 'Allah', but 'Yahweh' or 'Jehovah', (though Muslims may use the term for their own reasons).
It is of special significance because, as with all ancient names, the name carries special significance about the person.
Scholars generally agree that the name Jehovah stems from the Hebrew verb 'ha-wah' meaning 'become' or 'causes to become'.
This would fit the historical record of Gods activity on behalf of the Hebrews, becoming whatever was necessary to accomplish His purpose in relation to them. For example the leading them out of captivity to Egypt, the destruction of Pharoah and his army at the Red Sea, the miraculous provision of manna and the sustaining of their clothing and footwear.
Similarly He is able to become whatever He needs to even today to accomplish His purpose ... and that, Ahmad, includes the ability to preserve intact His original Word to mankind ... the Word known as The Bible!

 

What about the Gospel of Barnabas? Just because your Missionaries did not include it in the Bible, does it make it ignorable?

 

Lol! You can divide any name into funny meanings if you want. But thats not what the prophecies say. Probably you should give it a try at the Oxford University too.

P.S. I still couldn't find a website that gives English Translation of these verses.

 

God is given no less than 99 names in the Quran. All are His attributes. It doesn't matter.

I cannot take any word of the Bible as authentic.

This is why.

And this is how.

Furthermore, it was written many years after Jesus pbuh. The Quran was dictated word by word in front of Prophet Muhammad pbuh. So its much more authentic for me.
And it has scientific miracles instead of scientific errors.

 

Ahmad I have a question for you...
What do you think of hinduism and all the other religions apart Christianity and Islam?

 

Good question. In the Quran, God says that there hasn't been a nation where He did not send a warner or Prophet.

So the prophecies clearly show that they are also the Word of the same God who has sent all scriptures including the Vedas, the Bible and the Quran. There is only ONE God. We are all creatures of the same Creator.

BUT! It is mentioned in the Quran only that God would protect it. So it is the only one acceptable to me. All other scriptures have lost their originality.

 

I've come to the conclusion that this thread exists for one reason...so Ahmed can raise his post count...

 

Check if there is any original copy of the Bible and then use it. The existing four versions miss many verses. Some verses in the Bible can't be read aloud in front of your family . If those are the words of God. He must be loving pornography more than us

 

Of course it matters!
His name is unique to Him and apart from identifying Him from other gods it tells us about Him.
What if we start calling you by 98 different names Ahmed, the result would be misunderstanding and confusion - exactly what the Quran seems to have done with regards to the name of God.

Then why do you keep quoting from it?
Āl ‘Imrān [3]:3, 4, says: “He has revealed to you the Book with the truth, confirming the scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel, (Injīl), for the guidance of men.” So why do you not take it as authentic when the Quran encourages its use?

Actually no, much of the bible was recorded way before Jesus came to earth, by men like Moses, David and Ezekiel, it was 'compiled' as a complete book after Jesus, but definitely much was written before him, (you only have to look at the Dead Sea Scrolls and the prophecy of Isaiah).

The bible was written by those experiencing the things written about and was re-written by scribes who had to count every letter and the number of letters and words on every page - it was a serious matter to make a mistake with the sacred writings.
On the other hand Muhammed could not read and used only the facility of reciting things to others who would then also recite them and write them down.
I know which I would have more confidence in Ahmed!

 

Are you insane, or just too dumb, in that verse, moha and madh are two different, phrase, if its a name it should occur together and I repeat it does not occur together.

By the way to study hindu scriptures, I should be going to Varanasi, , Kashi, Hrisihkesh, badrinath or some such place in India, why on earth will I travel to Oxford, to learn more about Indian religion.

You see, unlike you, for me religion is a private matter, and I donot wear it on my sleeves, or go about castigating anybody who doesnt share the same faith as mine

By the way, that site I posted the link of, also has the verses written in english. Just go through them, and try finding it.

Anyhow, digitalpoint is about SEO and related topics, so since you are posting here, obviously, you must know enough to search in google for "rigveda translation". On the other hand, you might be too afraid that your false notions might come crashing down if you find the truth so you go about keeping your eyes closed to the obvious and muttering "Ignorance is bliss"

But do not worry my friend, I found the english translation of the entire Rig Veda, although, I cant stop you from claiming or assuming that the Rig Veda on that site is rigged

Also the site has downloadable versions, so if it is allowed in your part of the world to download from a site that goes against your belief, feel free to download the translated texts too.

There you go, the translations are all here.

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/rigintro.asp [a hindu website]
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/index.htm [a neutral and secular website]

On second thought, lets make it easier for you. You see all the pages of the directory that contains the translations in the first site seems to be indexed, in Google, so going by your theory, since its a name, it shouldnt be translated and should appear as it is, just like all other names in the Rig Veda. For example the god of fire is named Agni, so he will be referred to as Agni, both in the sanskrit and english version, you just cannot change a name to its literal equivalent in another language during translations since it is a proper noun, or something. So Agni is called Agni and not Fire in the english version.

Indra = name of the god of rain and harvest
Varuna = name of the god of wind
Agni = name of the god of fire
Asvins = name of the god of twin stars

So let us search for "Indra" in the rig veda , I am searching in the directory hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/hinduism/rigveda/ , that is where the translated texts are located.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...om/sacredscripts/hinduism/rigveda&btnG=Search

There are 52 results, so that shows the name Indra is there in the Rig Veda.

Now the second name , "Varuna"

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...om/sacredscripts/hinduism/rigveda&btnG=Search

There are 51 results for "Varuna"

Now lets search for Mohammad or Mohamad or Muhammad

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...om/sacredscripts/hinduism/rigveda&btnG=Search

hmmm.. zero result

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...om/sacredscripts/hinduism/rigveda&btnG=Search

again zero result

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...om/sacredscripts/hinduism/rigveda&btnG=Search

LOL not again, it is zero result.

Its the same thing with the word "ala", "allah" or "alah".

Aah , now you would say, in rig veda it is spelt differently, but than you would be contradicting yourselves, since in some earlier posts you said, it occurs as "mohammad" or "ala".

 

Talk about taking a verse out of context and twisting it to your own aims.

Try going back to John 16:26 - I will pray to my Father for you.

He is clearly praying on behalf of his disciples who he has just asked to stay up with him as he prepares himself for the trial of the cross. The disciples fail him by going back to sleep, but Jesus still prays for them knowing the immediate trial they will face and the trial they will face in taking the gospel to the world. All the disciples bar John died for the sake of spreading the gospel.

When he says I pray for those who shall believe through THEIR word - he is clearly talking about the word of the disciples - their coming ministry of spreading the gospel to the world.

As for the gospel of John's authenticity - I believe it is clearly written by the apostle John meaning it was written by someone who was there and writing from his own recollection - the personal story about Peter towards the end, and other similar items told in John but not repeated in any of the other gospels illustrates this was not some book created from a collection but a personal story by John - see John 21:24.

 

and spread a few links to sites he wants to benefit from

 

The original post was titled 'Jesus praying for Muslims in the Bible'

OK... how about...

"No, he wasn't, because they wouldn't exist for another 640 years"

Everything else is just semantics. Deal with it. The end.

This is the View from the Catbasket.

Meow Purr.

 

Where the heck are you getting that?
the Bible has no references to sex (other than making rules about it) or pornagrahy...

There is an original Bible, we don't know hebrew and greek so that we can understand it.

There are over 50 "translations" of the Bible, but most are used by cults, such as the jehovah's witnesses or mormons.
Just because someone says they are a Christain doesn't mean that they are.

 

You will find that the muslims that post here refer to 'Song of Solomon' as pornographic, yet they don't realize God invented sex between a man and his wife. Besides that it isn't pornographic....

It is a common trail they try to lead you on when they TRY to somehow make the Bible (Word of God) void. They can't handle the truth because if you put God's word up against mohamad, they would find mohamad to be an evil man who follows satan as an angel of light... Not the first or last religion that satan created.

 

God calls Himself with different names. Here are all the names.
And as for different languages, its like Abraham pbuh is called Ibrahim. Moses pbuh is called Moosa, Jesus pbuh is called Isa and so on.

This confirms that Torah and Injil were sent. The Bible of today is no that.
Deuteronomy 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you.

And all you people have done as added Gospels and interpolations to it.

Also:
"O Apostle! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say "We believe" with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie,- will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places: they say, 'If ye are given this, take it, but if not, beware!' If any one's trial is intended by God, thou hast no authority in the least for him against God. For such - it is not God's will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment. (The Noble Quran, 5:41)"

"Know they not Allah Knoweth what they conceal and what they reveal? And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book (i.e., the Bible), but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: 'This is from Allah,' To traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (The Noble Quran, 2:77-79)

I think you don't know the event of the first revelation. The Holy Spirit asked Muhammad pbuh to read but he said he couldn't read but then he embraced Muhammad pbuh and then he could read. It is mentioned in the Bible even in Isaiah 29:12.

 

Some thing that you wouldn't know is that some parts of the Bible were banned in South Africa due to porographic content.
Imagine, the "word of God" being banned for being too explicit. WOW

 

The Bible has plenty of references to sex - read the song of solomon for starters - other sex stories - Ammon rapes Absalom's sister
- Lot's daughter each commit incest with him
- David commits adultery with Bathsheba and then has her husband killed when he can't cover up the pregnancy
- Jesus and his response to the women caught in adultery
- and Adam knew his wife....
- Rom.2.26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions, for even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise the men leaving the natural use of the woman burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

I think you haven't read the Bible at all if you claim it has no sex in it. And as for not reading it in front of the family - thats a mistake - children should be allowed to ask questions and have it explained to them so no sicko takes advantage of ignorance.

 

Ahmad, so what do you think of the Rig Veda stuff I posted. Did you find some reference ?

 

Abraham and Ibrahim are not different names, they are the same name as pronounced in different countries. God does not have different names, He has one name, Jehovah, although He has many qualities and may be referred to by those qualities, e.g. love, power, wisdom and justice ... but these are not names.

I don't think that you quite understand!
Let's just take the Torah, about which Surah 3.2 says, “He has revealed to you the Book with the truth, confirming the scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel for the guidance of men, and the distinction between right and wrong.”

Are you saying that Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy are not in the bible today?????

Who is "You people"?

Isaiah 29:12 has nothing to say about Muhammed. let's see what it IS talking about:-

So here God does not refer to Muhammed at all, He is talking about the spiritually degenerate state of many in Israel and even the leaders were unable to discern the importance of the visions given to Isaiah. They were likened to men who were either able to read or not but who would be unable to read and understand the vision.
Read the context of the scriptures instead of clutching at a word or an expression that can be misused to support your theories.
If you still believe that it refers to Muhammed then look at what it ays in verse 13, because that must refer to him too!