Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'ماذا قال يسوع على الصليب؟'.
Most of the Muslims use the "Jesus said 'my God why have you forsaken me", and they take it out of context to fit their needs (that is, the Quranic need of Jesus NOT being the son of God [لم يلد ولم يولد]). Why do you think Christians don't believe in this interpretation and convert to Judaism, or Islam? This would actually be a very strong argument to not only believe that Jesus isn't the son of God, also not the Messiah, and not a prophet, etc. Then why? What's the meaning behind it? In Aramaic, Jesus' mother tongue; Damning evidence, no? Juxtapose this to the Syriac (Aramaic) OT, Psalm 22, (according to this copy page 333) Just so we're clear: We all see (only Estrangelo script is supported on my computer so, a bit different script, but same letters) So compare the texts: we have There' not exactly the same, are they? Well yes, and no. [ܐܝܠ] and [ܐܠܗܝ] are textually different, but they are indicative of the same thing. [Aeli] [Alahi] To quote Dukhrana Therefore, we can conclude that they have one and the same meaning, one being the Syriac name for God, the other, Palestinian Aramaic. But who is this [Aeli] Jesus is calling to? Funny enough I've heard Shia Muslims claim that he was calling for the Shia Imam Ali. Ever notice names like "Michael" "Gabriel" etc, and what they mean. Michael (מיכ אל)is both Hebrew and Aramaic, meaning [micha] "like" and "el" God, meaning "who is like God" Gabriel (גברי אל) is Hebrew meaning [gavari/gabori] "My strength [is]" and "el" God, meaning "My strength is God" So it's obvious Jesus is referring to God, not Elijah, like the Jews think (Eli, Elohi and all that sounds like "Eliyah" the Aramaic name for Elijah, alt. Eliyahu) Not only that but Jesus is quoting a Psalm, and isn't saying this because "God left him, so he can't be God", which is what Muslims think. But what's so special about this Psalm? There's a whole anthology available on this, and Wiki has a good summary, Any Christian (or anyone familiar with The Passion) can tell you why this is one of the most important Psalms, and as I stated earlier, it's one of my favorite. The Jews would say that "This Psalm isn't even about the Messiah", but we know from their Messianic predictions that they believe the Messiah will rebuild the Third Temple. Jesus lived from ~1-33 AD (from the time of the Second temple, that's a fact), and the Jewish temple was destroyed by the Romans in the year 70AD (also a fact). Now I ask you; how is it the prophecy of the third temple could exist before the second temple was even in threat of being destroyed? The answer is that Jews change the prophecies around to match their needs. At one point, their chazals (the sages, basically the ancient Jewish 3ulema2) saw that Jesus did fulfill the Messianic prophecies, so they changed the prophecies interpretation (NOT THE WORDS, the words are written in Tanakh) to make Jesus not seem like the Jewish Messiah. Jews have known this, and there are many "Jews for Jesus", Hebrew Catholics etc who still keep the Torah laws (as prescribed by Paul, while the Gentiles have a more relaxed law, Noachide). For further proof of this, if you go to Isaiah 7:14: In the Septuagint (Greek Bible) it says for virgin [Παρθένου, parthenou], and in Hebrew, it is a young woman [עלמה: almah], not necessarily a virgin. Jews LOVE this argument. So then, how do we answer this? Since the original text was in Hebrew, and the Septuagint says virgin, which do we believe? The answer is both are correct: The Septuagint was made by 70 Jewish Greek scholars, who interpreted the word [almah] as virgin, dictated by the prophecy of the time. How could a Jewish scholar make this "mistake"? Now ask yourself how could 70 Jewish scholars make such a big mistake...remember, this a Jewish source, and was done 300 years before Christ. Not only that, but the Jews were forced to write it down by the Greek-Egyptian king Ptolemy II, a pagan, and masha2allah nothing was corrupted. In my Criticism of Religious Works class, we learned this was actually one of the reasons the Jews don't follow the Septuagint anymore. The prophecy existed, but when Jesus fulfilled it, it was changed: the Septuagint proves this. So why is his name not Immanuel? Because it says he will be called, not that his name will be. He is also said to have the name "Prince of Peace, mighty God," etc. So then these prophecies in Isaiah are taken to mean qualities of the messiah, and actually what he will be called by the people. The argument doesn't justify the Muslim idea that Jesus can't be God, nor the Jewish idea that he was calling for Elijah.
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.