Galatians 5:2 Twisted By Muslims

SOME Muslims continue to TWIST and DISTORT Galatians 5:2 in their effort to MISLEAD the INNOCENT as well as the IGNORANT.

A MUSLIM who calls himself Bom Bastic posted Galatians 5:2 in Answering Muslims and ISOLATED IT from its context.

To Bom Bastic, THAT ISSUE has LONG BEEN RESOLVED and EXPLAINED.

YOU are RAISING a WORN OUT ISSUE.

PAUL was REFERRING to CIRCUMCISION as OBEDIENCE to JEWISH LAWS.

GALATIANS 5:2 says, "Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you.

READ YOUR POST. IT SAYS, "Paul abolished circumcision which is included in the LAW (TORAH)."

That fact is shown by Paul in the following verse in Galatians 5:3, where he says: "Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the ENTIRE LAW."

TRADITIONAL CIRCUMCISION, like what FILIPINOS DO, is NOT ACCORDING to JEWISH LAWS, but BASED on FOLK TRADITION which WELCOMES YOUNG MEN to MANHOOD.

MUSLIMS are just DISPLAYING a LACK of KNOWLEDGE with their USE of GALATIANS 5:2.

That GIVES CREDENCE to the DECLARATION of PETER that MANY who DO NOT UNDERSTAND the WRITINGS of PAUL are IGNORANT.

2PETER 3:15-16
So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters.

There are some things in them hard to understand, which the IGNORANT and UNSTABLE TWIST to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.

NO WITNESSES FOR MUHAMMAD

MUSLIMS have been UNABLE to SHOW ANY PROOF or WITNESSES that GOD HIMSELF CALLED, APPOINTED and SENT THEIR PROPHET.

THEY also CANNOT SHOW ANY WITNESSES that "ANGEL GABRIEL" GAVE the QURAN to THEIR PROPHET.

To ESCAPE this EMBARRASSING SITUATION, MUSLIMS TRY to TURN the TABLES by SEEKING VERSES in the BIBLE where WITNESSES were PRESENT when GOD APPOINTED PROPHETS or ISSUED REVELATIONS.

Sadly, and AS USUAL, MUSLIMS JUST DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.

+++

First, let us address their demand for WITNESSES when GOD SENDS or APPOINTS a PROPHET.

A. MANY WITNESSES FOR MOSES

MUSLIMS CLAIM that THEIR PROPHET is the "PROPHET LIKE MOSES" as prophesied in DEUTERONOMY 18:18.

By CLAIMING THAT, MUSLIMS SHOULD PROVE that THEIR PROPHET was SENT IN THE SAME WAY that MOSES was SENT by GOD.

GOD GAVE MANY SIGNS and WONDERS that were WITNESSED BY THE ISRAELITES to PROVE that HE SENT MOSES. But let us just FOCUS on one where GOD PERSONALLY APPEARED to the LEADERS of ISRAEL to PROVE that HE WAS the ONE APPOINTING MOSES.

In EXODUS 24:1-11, GOD GAVE MOSES His COMMANDMENTS. And to PROVE to the PEOPLE of ISRAEL that HE WAS THE ONE GIVING the LAWS, HE PERSONALLY APPEARED to their LEADERS.

We will read this in EXODUS 24:1, 9-11.

"Then he [GOD] said to Moses, "Come up to the LORD, you and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship at a distance."

"Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, and THEY SAW THE GOD OF ISRAEL. Under his feet there was something like a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness.

"God did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel; also THEY BEHELD GOD, and they ate and drank."

THIS is CLEAR PROOF that GOD ALLOWED WITNESSES to SEE and PROVE that HE WAS THE ONE who SENT MOSES and GAVE HIS COMMANDMENTS.

GOD ALLOWED MORE THAN 70 WITNESSES to SEE HIM.
.
.
MUSLIMS CLAIM that THEIR PROPHET was the "PROPHET LIKE MOSES."

When GOD APPOINTED MOSES as the BRINGER of HIS LAWS to the ISRAELITES, HE SHOWED HIMSELF to MANY WITNESSES.

WHERE are the MANY WITNESSES who would TESTIFY that GOD ALSO SENT and APPOINTED the PROPHET of ISLAM as HIS BRINGER o MESSENGER of HIS LAWS?

MUSLIMS ADMIT that THERE ARE NONE.
.
.
Well, there are TWO IMPORTANT POINTS HERE:

1. MUSLIMS ADMIT that THERE ARE NO WITNESSES that GOD HIMSELF CALLED, SENT and APPOINTED THEIR PROPHET.

2. The PROPHET of ISLAM is NOT A PROPHET LIKE MOSES, BELYING THEIR CLAIMS.

+++

B. MUSLIM EXCUSES

Again, WHEN MUSLIMS are CAUGHT in their FALSE CLAIMS, THEY TRY to WIGGLE THEMSELVES OUT by trying to TURN THE TABLES on PEOPLE QUESTIONING THEM.

In this case, MUSLIMS will ATTACK the BIBLE for being "CONTRADICTORY."

THEY will cite VERSES LIKE EXODUS 33:20, JOHN 1:18, JOHN 5:37, and 1TIMOTHY 6:16.

They say, these verses declare that "GOD CANNOT BE SEEN."

And that EXPOSES MORE LACK of UNDERSTANDING on the PART of MUSLIMS and THEIR LACK of KNOWLEDGE about BIBLICAL TRUTHS: specifically about the HOLY TRINITY or the ONE GOD with THREE PERSONS: The FATHER, The SON, and The HOLY SPIRIT.

For a FULLER EXPLANATION, please GO to THIS LINK: http://sagot-sa-balik-islam.blogspot.com/2009/08/ex-3320-di-puwedeng-makita-ang-diyos.html

THOSE VERSES talk about GOD THE FATHER. HE is the ONE WHO CANNOT BE SEEN or HEARD.

THERE is a PERSON in the ONE GOD who CAN BE SEEN. HE is GOD THE SON, the IMAGE of the LIVING GOD. (COLOSSIANS 1:15)

THIS VISIBLE IMAGE of GOD, THIS PERSON of the TRINITY, was WHO the ISRAELITES SAW in EXODUS 24:9-11.

THIS VISIBLE IMAGE of GOD was also the ONE referred to in EXODUS 33:11 as the GOD whom MOSES TALKED TO "FACE TO FACE."

EXODUS 33:11
"Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses FACE TO FACE, as one speaks to a friend."

MUSLIMS have a HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING these VERSES because THEY INSIST on their BELIEF that "THERE IS NO TRINITY." And that is why THEY MISTAKENLY THINK that certain verses in the Bible "CONTRADICT."

THERE are NO CONTRADICTIONS in the BIBLE. MUSLIMS just DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT the BIBLE is SAYING.

THEY also MAKE UP "CONTRADICTIONS" in a DESPERATE MOVE to HIDE THEIR INABILITY to PROVE that THEIR PROPHET was CALLED, SENT and APPOINTED BY GOD.

PAUL OR MUHAMMAD: Who Should We Believe?

MUSLIMS love to attack Paul.

They accuse the apostle of founding Christianity and misquote his words as if they understood them.

But I suspect that MUSLIMS are simply JEALOUS of PAUL because HE is a TRUE MESSENGER of GOD. GOD PERSONALLY CALLED and SENT PAUL to DELIVER HIS WORDS to PEOPLE.

On the contrary, MUSLIMS CANNOT PROVE that GOD PERSONALLY CALLED and SENT THEIR PROPHET as His messenger.

SAD.

+++

Now, it will surely ANGER MUSLIMS MORE if WE PROVE that PAUL was TRULY a CHOSEN MESSENGER of GOD.

But the TRUTH is a BURDEN that WE WILL GIVE to MUSLIMS in the HOPE that THEY WOULD OPEN THEIR EYES and FIND SALVATION through it.

+++

WHO should we BELIEVE: A MESSENGER whom GOD HIMSELF CALLED and SENT or one who CANNOT BE PROVEN to have been SENT BY GOD?

WE BELIEVE the TRUE MESSENGER of GOD.

BETWEEN PAUL and ISLAM'S PROPHET, PAUL is the TRUE MESSENGER.

Here's PROOF.

+++

A. GOD PERSONALLY CALLED PAUL

In ACTS 9:3-6
"Now as he was going along and approaching Damascus, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him.

"He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

"He asked, "Who are you, Lord?" The reply came, "I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

"But get up and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do."

CLEARLY, IT was GOD HIMSELF who CALLED PAUL.
.
.
B. MANY WITNESSED THE CALLING OF PAUL

a. In ACTS 9:7, we see that PAUL'S COMPANIONS WITNESSED GOD'S CALLING of PAUL.

"The men who were traveling with him stood speechless because they heard the voice but saw no one."

The COMPANIONS of PAUL "HEARD THE VOICE" the GOD who CALLED him.

b. In ACTS 22:9, the Bible says, "Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the one who was speaking to me."

The WITNESSES SAW the LIGHT and HEARD the VOICE, although they did not understand what was being said.

So, CLEARLY, the CALLING of PAUL was NOT ONLY HIS CLAIM but IT WAS SEEN and HEARD by MANY WITNESSES.
.
.
C. GOD TOLD EARLY CHRISTIANS ABOUT HIS CALLING OF PAUL

a. ANANIAS

Apart from PERSONALLY CALLING PAUL, GOD also TOLD the CHRISTIAN ANANIAS about HIS MISSION for the APOSTLE.

ACTS 9:10-16
"Now there was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias. The Lord said to him in a vision, "Ananias." He answered, "Here I am, Lord."

"The Lord said to him, "Get up and go to the street called Straight, and at the house of Judas look for a man of Tarsus named Saul. At this moment he is praying, and he has seen in a vision a man named Ananias come in and lay his hands on him so that he might regain his sight."

"But Ananias answered, "Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints in Jerusalem; and here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who invoke your name."

"But the Lord said to him, "Go, for HE IS AN INSTRUMENT WHOM I HAVE CHOSEN to bring my name before Gentiles and kings and before the people of Israel; I myself will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name."

b. CHURCH OF ANTIOCH

GOD even TOLD the CHURCH at ANTIOCH--MANY DISCIPLES--that HE had a SPECIAL MISSION for PAUL, who was then still called SAUL.

ACTS 13:1-2
"Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen a member of the court of Herod the ruler, and Saul.

"While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "SET APART FOR ME Barnabas and SAUL for the work to which I have called them."

CLEARLY, GOD REVEALED the SPECIAL CALLING of PAUL (SAUL) to MANY EARLY CHRISTIANS.

So, it was not only a CLAIM of PAUL.

The CALLING of PAUL was DECLARED BY GOD to MANY OTHERS.
.
.
D. PETER ACKNOWLEDGED PAUL'S WORDS AS GOD'S WORDS

In 2PETER 3:15-16, the LEADER of the APOSTLES SAID:
"and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother PAUL WROTE to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters.

"There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the OTHER SCRIPTURES."

Here, Peter referred to the WRITINGS of PAUL as "SCRIPTURES," or HOLY WRITINGS or GOD'S WORDS. This is shown by Peter talking about PAUL'S WRITINGS and referring to SACRED TEXTS as "OTHER SCRIPTURES."

+++

So, EVIDENCE is ABUNDANT that PAUL was a TRUE MESSENGER of GOD.

1. HE was PERSONALLY CALLED and SENT BY GOD.

2. HIS CALLING was WITNESSED by MANY.

3. GOD also TOLD EARLY CHRISTIANS of HIS CALLING of PAUL.

4. PAUL was ACKNOWLEDGED by the LEADER of the EARLY CHURCH as SPEAKING the WORDS of GOD.

+++

DID GOD CALL, APPOINT AND SEND ISLAM'S PROPHET?

Now, ASK ANY MUSLIM to PRESENT SIMILAR PROOF that GOD CALLED and APPOINTED their PROPHET as a MESSENGER OF GOD.

MUSLIMS WILL NOT be ABLE to PRESENT ANY EVIDENCE.

1. THEY will NOT SHOW ANY CLAIM--NOT EVEN BY THEIR PROPHET--that GOD PERSONALLY TALKED TO HIM to SEND HIM as a PROPHET.

2. MUSLIMS WILL NOT be ABLE to PRESENT ANY WITNESS who SAW or HEARD GOD SEND THEIR PROPHET as a MESSENGER OF GOD.

3. MUSLIMS WILL NOT be ABLE to NAME ANYONE to whom GOD REVEALED that HE WAS SENDING THEIR PROPHET.

4. NO EARLY MUSLIM LEADER HIGHER THAN ISLAM'S PROPHET TESTIFIED that HIS WORDS were FROM GOD.

Simply put, MUSLIMS CANNOT GIVE EVIDENCE that THEIR PROPHET was INDEED CALLED, APPOINTED and SENT BY GOD.

+++

"EVIDENCE" FOR THE PROPHET OF ISLAM

UNABLE to GIVE CONCRETE EVIDENCE that GOD PERSONALLY CALLED, APPOINTED and SENT THEIR PROPHET, MUSLIMS CITE VERSES in the QURAN to "PROVE" that THEIR PROPHET was "TRUE."

Examples of verses used by Muslims are:
Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself. And we have sent you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness. (QURAN 4:79)

Verily, We have sent to you (O men) a Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) to be a witness over you, as We did send a Messenger [Musa (Moses)] to Fir'aun (Pharaoh).  QURAN 73:15

But THERE IS A VERY BIG PROBLEM in regard to these VERSES: ASK ANY MUSLIM if THERE is PROOF that GOD HIMSELF SPOKE THOSE WORDS, HE WOULD AVOID the QUESTION.

Why?

Because MUSLIMS KNOW that GOD WAS NOT THE ONE who SPOKE the WORDS of the QURAN.

According to ISLAMIC TEACHING, the QURAN was "REVEALED" by the "ANGEL GABRIEL" to THEIR PROPHET MUHAMMAD. (QURAN 16:102 http://www.searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=16&translator=5#102)

MUSLIMS SAY that NO MAN COULD HEAR GOD. That was why God supposedly "spoke" the Quran "THROUGH" this "angel."

So, THEY UNWITTINGLY ADMIT that the QURAN was NOT THE WORDS of GOD but the WORDS of an "ANGEL."

But then ANOTHER BIG PROBLEM EMERGES: MUSLIMS WILL ADMIT that NO ONE ELSE SAW or HEARD THIS "ANGEL" when it "REVEALED" the QURAN to their PROPHET.

They will say that it "ONLY" THEIR PROPHET SAW and HEARD this "ANGEL."

And, IT WAS ONLY THEIR PROPHET who RECITED the VERSES of the QURAN to THEM.

Ultimately, therefore, MUSLIMS ADMIT that IT WAS ONLY THEIR PROPHET who TOLD THEM the QURAN. It was ONLY THE WORDS of THEIR PROPHET that THEY HEARD.

NO ONE HEARD GOD SPEAK the QURAN. NO ONE HEARD an "ANGEL" SAY the QURAN.

Basically, the QURAN was only the WORDS of THEIR PROPHET.

SEEING THAT, it can be said that the VERSES of the QURAN that MUSLIMS USE to PROVE their PROPHET are ONLY THE WORDS of THEIR PROPHET.

So, it becomes apparent that ONLY THEIR PROPHET GAVE the VERSES that SHOW THAT GOD APPOINTED HIM as a MESSENGER.

Some might call the verses as "SELF-SERVING."

Therefore, the VERSES USED by MUSLIMS are NOT REAL PROOF; NOT REAL EVIDENCE for their PROPHET.

+++

Now, COMPARE PAUL and ISLAM'S PROPHET. WHO would you BELIEVE to be GOD'S TRUE MESSENGER?

I CHOOSE PAUL who has SOLID EVIDENCE that GOD PERSONALLY CALLED, APPOINTED and SENT HIM as the MESSENGER of the ALMIGHTY.

Jesus Not God because He also "has a God"?

MUSLIM Ben Langcuyan has a problem with my assertion that GOD IS ALL POWERFUL THAT'S WHY HE BECAME MAN IN THE PERSON OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

Ben Langcuyan said:
"Bibe presented above a VERY INCONSISTENT CLAIM --- that God became a man and that man is called Jesus.

Now, granting without conceding --- that God became a man and that man is called Jesus.

The problem Bibe is facing now is --- Jesus is still claiming that he has a God. Note of his following lines:

'... our God is one. ...'

'... my God, my God, why has Thou forsaken me?'

'... to my God and your God. To my Father and your Father.'

It's pretty clear now, using logic and Biblical claims, that the claim of Bibe that the God became a man --- completely BASELESS!!!

+++

There is NOTHING INCONSISTENT with the ALL-POWERFUL GOD BECOMING MAN.

The INCONSISTENCY is in the CLAIM of MUSLIMS that THEIR GOD is ALL-POWERFUL and YET IS POWERLESS to BECOME MAN.

Now, Ben Langcuyan cited several VERSES that he claimed SHOWS that the LORD JESUS CANNOT BE GOD.

Ben Langcuyan SIMPLY JUST DOES NOT UNDERSTAND the PROCLAMATION of the LORD JESUS that HE HAS a GOD.

HIS LACK of UNDERSTANDING SHOWS in the EXAMPLES HE GAVE.

1. '... our God is one. ...' is taken from the OLD TESTAMENT, where the LORD JESUS simply QUOTED DEUTERONOMY 6:4.

HE actually REFERRED to HIMSELF when HE CITED DEUT 6:4.

DEUT 6:4 refers to the GOD "I AM" who REVEALED HIS NAME to MOSES in EXODUS 3:13-14.

The LORD JESUS said that HE is the "I AM." (JOHN 8:58)

So, He was even PROCLAIMING HIS DIVINITY when He cited DEUT 6:4.

2. '... my God, my God, why has Thou forsaken me?' THIS is NOT a PRAYER of the LORD JESUS CALLING on GOD the FATHER.

This text from MATTHEW 27:46 was BORROWED by the LORD JESUS from PSALM 22:2, which is known as a PRAYER of the OPPRESSED.

The LORD JESUS used this verse to HIGHLIGHT HIMSELF as "GOD WITH US." (MATTHEW 1:23)

He was telling the OPPRESSED that GOD HIMSELF is WITH THOSE who are OPPRESSED, and that GOD was SUFFERING WITH THEM.

So, again, the LORD JESUS was only PROCLAIMING HIS OWN DIVINITY when He used PSALM 22:2 in MATTHEW 27:46.

3. '... to my God and your God. To my Father and your Father.' - In this verse from JOHN 20:17, the LORD JESUS STRESSED that HIS GOD is also HIS FATHER.

If GOD is the FATHER of the LORD JESUS, then the LORD JESUS is STRESSING HIS DIVINITY, for the SON of GOD naturally TAKES the NATURE of HIS FATHER.

Thus, if GOD is the FATHER of the LORD JESUS, then the LORD JESUS is also DECLARING that HE IS GOD.

So, INSTEAD of DIMINISHING the DIVINITY of the LORD JESUS, the VERSES that Ben Langcuyan CITED ONLY SUPPORT the belief that HE IS GOD.

Ben Langcuyan just DOES NOT UNDERSTAND the VERSES that HE USED.

Aisha Mature When Muhammad had Sex with Her?

A. Aisha's Age

APPARENTLY ashamed that their prophet Muhammad married a 6-year-old girl and had sex with her when she was 9 years old, Muslims have been coming up with various explanations to prove that the girl was already in puberty at a young age.

Muslims claim that 9-year-old girls during the time of their prophet where “big” (malaki ang bulas) or were already in puberty, or was already menstruating.

But the Hadiths, or traditions about the life of Islam’s prophet, contradict all the explanations of Muslim apologists.

The Hadiths, particularly that of Bukhari—which the Islamic world considers as the most reliable collection of stories about Islam’s prophet—clearly show that the 9-year-old Aisha was still a “little girl” or “young girl” when their prophet had taken her for his wife.

It is notable that many of the accounts that say that Aisha was a “little” or “young” girl was told by the Aisha herself.

B. The TRUTH According to the Hadith

Following are some of the Hadith accounts that show this fact and truth.

1. SAHIH (AUTHENTIC) BUKHARI BOOK 62, HADITH 163

Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet was screening me with his Rida' (garment covering the upper part of the body) while I was looking at the Ethiopians who were playing in the courtyard of the mosque. (I continued watching) till I was satisfied. So you may deduce from this event how a little girl (who has not reached the age of puberty) who is eager to enjoy amusement should be treated in this respect.

In this hadith, Islam’s prophet kept the “LITTLE GIRL” Aisha in his UPPER GARMENT. This shows the CHILD being HELD CLOSE to the BODY of Islam’s prophet.

Islamic tradition prohibits the mingling of NON-RELATIVE MALES and FEMALES, more so A FEMALE BEING HELD CLOSE to the BODY of a NON-RELATIVE MALE. This shows that the “LITTLE GIRL” was already the WIFE of Islam’s prophet when he HELD HER CLOSE to HIS BODY.

This shows that according to Aisha, she was still a “LITTLE GIRL,” one who “HAS NOT REACHED THE AGE OF PUBERTY” when the prophet of Muslims TOOK HER INTO HIS ARMS in MARRIAGE.

2.  SAHIH BUKHARI BOOK 73, HADITH 151

Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)  (Book #73, Hadith #151)

According to Aisha, she was still PLAYING WITH DOLLS when Islam’s prophet “used to enter (my dwelling place).” This fact prompted the highly regarded commentary FATEH-AL-BARI [also FATH-UL-BARI] to explain that “'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.”

Muslims will say that the hadith does not say that Aisha ang their prophet were already married and living together at that time.

But again, Islamic tradition prohibits NON-RELATED MALES from ENTERING the DWELLING PLACES of FEMALES. The fact that Islam’s prophet freely ENTERED the dwelling place of the “LITTLE GIRL” showed that Aisha has STILL “not yet reached the age of puberty” when they started living together.

3. SAHIH BUKHARI BOOK 92, HADITH 562

Narrated 'Aisha: After the slanderers had given a forged statement against her, Allah's Apostle called 'Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid when the Divine Inspiration was delayed. He wanted to ask them and consult them about the question of divorcing me. Usama gave his evidence that was based on what he knew about my innocence, but 'Ali said, "Allah has not put restrictions on you and there are many women other than her. Furthermore you may ask the slave girl who will tell you the truth." So the Prophet asked Barira (my salve girl), "Have you seen anything that may arouse your suspicion?" She replied, "I have not seen anything more than that she is a little girl who sleeps, leaving the dough of her family (unguarded) that the domestic goats come and eat it." Then the Prophet stood on the pulpit and said, "O Muslims! Who will help me against the man who has harmed me by slandering my wife? By Allah, I know nothing about my family except good." The narrator added: Then the Prophet mentioned the innocence of 'Aisha. (See Hadith No. 274, Vol. 6)

The LITTLE GIRL, Aisha, was already MARRIED and LIVING WITH Islam’s prophet when she was accused of being UNFAITHFUL to him. So, Aisha’s slave girl, BARIRA, had to testify on her behalf.

According to the hadith, Barira declared that the WIFE of Islam’s prophet was “a little girl” who even neglects her basic duties as a child.

In HADITH 48, BOOK 829, Barira is even cited as saying, “I have never seen in her anything faulty except that she (Aisha) is a girl of IMMATURE AGE.”

C. CONCLUSION

There are more hadiths that show the same thing: that Aisha was a “LITTLE GIRL” and of “IMMATURE AGE” when she became the wife of Islam’s prophet.

And these hadiths PROVE that the explanations of Muslim apologists are ALL WRONG.

The WIFE of Islam’s prophet HAD NOT REACHED the AGE OF PUBERTY when she was MARRIED and LIVED with him. She was still a “LITTLE GIRL” and NOT “BIG” as Muslims claim.

Is God One or Many?

MUSLIMS attack the Bible by citing an alleged contradiction in the Bible where in one verse it said that there is one God and in several others it supposedly portrayed God as being many.

Detractors of the Bible use Deuteronomy 6:4 against Genesis 1:26, Genesis 3:22, Genesis 18:1-3 and 1John 5:7.

They say Deut 6:4 says, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord.” So, the Bible says that there is one God.

On the other hand, they say Gen 1:26, 3:22, 18:1-3 and 1Jn 5:7 (KJV) indicate that there are “many Gods.”

For example, Gen 1:26 says: Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness.”

They stress the use of “US” and “OUR” which indicate a plurality or which involve many—as Muslims say “many Gods.”

So, using Deut 6:4 and Gen 1:26 and the other verses, Muslims say the Bible contradicts itself on the number of God or Gods.

Muslims are simply mistaken. There is no contradiction in the Bible. Muslims just do not understand what the verses and the Bible are saying.

+++

A. RESPONSE:

THE verses cited by Muslims only point to the TRUTH that God is ONE and He has MANY PERSONS.

Muslims do not understand this truth because they choose to confuse themselves by insisting that being ONE GOD is “CONTRADICTORY” to GOD having MANY PERSONS.

No, there are no contradictions there. In fact, there are many in God’s creations that are ONE and yet MANY.

Take the family for example. The family is ONE, but it has MANY MEMBERS.

Muslims even have their UMMAH as an example of ONE but HAVING MANY MEMBERS.

Sadly, Muslims ignore facts so they could continue with their wrong idea about God, who is ONE but having MANY PERSONS—a TRINITY.

The declaration of Deut 6:4 that God is one shows the fact that God is NOT a ABSOLUTE ONE, but a UNITED ONE.

The Hebrew word in Deut 6.4 that is translated as “one” is “ECHAD.”

Let is note that “echad” is the same word used by God in Genesis 2:24, where He said that “a man … clings to his wife, and they become ONE flesh.” This refers to marriage.

Notice that TWO: a man and a woman, are JOINED to form ONE (echad) flesh. So, the ONE referred to is NOT an ABSOLUTE ONE but a “UNION of TWO.”

That is the same condition referred to in Deut 6:4, when it says, God is ONE. It is not saying that God is an absolute one, but a UNION of MANY, such as a union of MANY PERSONS or individual members.

Now, this UNION of MANY PERSONS is also indicated in one of the Hebrew words for God—ELOHIM.

Elohim means God. It shows ONE God, but the word itself is PLURAL, which indicates the MANY in the ONE God.

This PLURALITY in the ONE God is the truth expressed in say Gen 1:26, 3:22, 18:1-3 and 1Jn 5:7 (KJV).

In Gen 1:26, God is ONE but is shows Him TALKING to His other members: "Let US make humankind in OUR image, according to OUR likeness.”

The same is shown in Gen 3.22 where God says, “the man has become like one of US,” again indicating that there are MANY MEMBERS in the Godhead.

At first, in the Old Testament, people did not understand this PLURALITY in the ONE God. It was only fully revealed when the Lord Jesus, the Second Person of the One God, became man and introduced God as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 28:19)

Man also began to understand that God is a Trinity when the Third Person of the One God came upon the first Christians on Pentecost day.

Thus, Christians believe in One God who has 3 Persons: The Father, the Son, and The Holy Spirit.

Again, there is NO CONTRADICTION in regard to that as Muslims claim.

Is God Everywhere and All-knowing or Not?

MUSLIMS claim that the Bible contradicts itself in regard to God’s omnipresence and omniscience.

They give two sets of verses to prove the “contradiction.”

These verses are Proverbs 15:3, Psalm 139:7-10 and Job 34:21-22. These, Muslims say, show that God is present everywhere and knows all.

The other set includes Genesis 3:8, 11:5 and 18:20-21, which they claim contradicts the first set.

The two sets do not contradict.

A. RESPONSE:

Proverbs 15:3; Ps 139:7-10; and Job 34:21-22 talk of the general truth that God is omnipresent and omniscient. He is everywhere and all-knowing.

Genesis 3:8, 11:5 and 18:20-21 do not deny God’s omniscience and omnipresence. They merely stress God’s PERSONAL INVOLVEMENT in the affairs of men.

Genesis 3:8 shows God personally walking in the garden to provide His visible presence to the first man and woman.

Genesis 11:5 shows how God personally felt offended by the effort of men to reach heaven and be like God. The same is true with Genesis 18:20-21.

So, there are no contradictions in the two sets of verses: The first set tells of the truth God is everywhere and is all-knowing. The second tells us that GOD HIMSELF gets INVOLVED in what we do.

The problem with Islam is that it has the belief that God cannot be personally involved in the affairs of men. This belief runs contrary to the revelations and actions of God in history.

In both Judaism and Christianity, which Muslims claim are related to Islam, God revealed Himself in a personal way and has directly involved Himself in their affairs.

But that issue aside and going back to the verses, the problem with Muslims is that they make claims about Biblical texts based on wrong appreciation and understanding of the verses.

Mark 10:18 (Jesus Denied that He is God?)

MUSLIMS who deny the divinity of the Lord Jesus sometimes use Mark 10:18 to prove that Christ denied that He was God.

The verse reads:

“Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”

The context of the verse is about a man who knelt before the Lord Jesus and then says to the Christ: "Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" (Mark 10:17)

Muslims see the response of the Lord Jesus in Mark 10:18 as a rebuke or a contradiction to what the man said. To them, the Lord was saying, “I am not God, so don’t call me good.”

But did the Lord Jesus really rebuke the man for calling Him “Good”?

A. CHRISTIAN RESPONSE

THE words of the Lord Jesus in Mark 10:18 were neither a rebuke nor a contradiction to the man addressing Him with a term pertaining only to God.

A rebuke would have sounded like “DO NOT call me good. Only God is good” or “I am not good. Only God is good” or “Only God is good. I am not God.”

The Lord did not make such a clear, undeniable rebuke. What He did was ASK A QUESTION.

Often, questions are asked to raise clarifications or to challenge others to prove that they are sure of what they are saying or talking about.

When the Lord Jesus told the man “Why do you call me good? Only God is good”, He was telling the man, “You called me good. Only God is good. Are you acknowledging that I am God?”

The answer of the man to the question whether he was acknowledging the divinity of the Lord Jesus was important, especially if we read the answer of the Lord Jesus to his question: “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”

In Mark 10:19, the Lord said, “You know the commandments: 'You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; You shall not defraud; Honor your father and mother.'"

Those were commandments given by God Himself to Moses. (Exodus 20:1-17) And to the mind of the man, he already fulfilled those commandments (Mark 10:20), thus he was already entitled to eternal life.

But then, the Lord Jesus did not stop there. He continued: “Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me."

Mark 10:22 says that when the man heard those words, “he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions.”

“But why?” we might ask. Why should the man grieve at what the Lord Jesus said and especially because those were not part of the original commandments? One might even argue that since those were only the words of Jesus, it would not really matter? What was important was the man had obeyed the commandments of God.

Could the words of a “teacher”or a prophet or a ”servant” of God overrule the very commandments of God? Of course not!

The man was shocked and grieved because he did not see the Lord Jesus only as a simple “teacher” or “prophet,”but as the “Good Teacher.” “Good” meaning God as the Lord Jesus had pointed out.

The man believed that the Lord Jesus was God and that He had the authority to give “additional”commandments or to demand more on top of the commandments that He had already given.

So, when the Lord Jesus gave the “additional” commandment for the man to “go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor” (Mark 10:21), the man became sad because it was GOD who was telling him to do it.

Therefore, Mark 10:18 is not a denial of the divinity of the Lord Jesus. On the contrary, it is an affirmation of His Godhood.

Muslims, in their desire to disprove that the Lord Jesus is God, are seeing the opposite of what things really are.

Matthew 10:34 (Jesus: Not Peace but a Sword)

SOME MUSLIMS try to defame the Lord Jesus by giving a wrong interpretation of Matthew 10:34.

The verse reads: "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword."

Using that, some Muslims say that the Lord Jesus was not a peace maker but a warrior. They claim He does not bring unity but division.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

+++

QUICK RESPONSE:
 A. Simply put, Muslims do not understand or deliberately distort Matthew 10:34.

When the Lord Jesus said that He did not come to bring peace, He was referring to the expectation of the Jews who were waiting for a political messiah.

The Jews were waiting for a messiah who would restore the kingdom of Israel and bring peace to the land. (Luke 24:21; Acts 1:6) It was a political peace. No more wars. No more disputes.

That was the context when the Lord Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth."

His goal was not to bring political peace but "a sword" or a SEPARATION of those who would believe in Him and those who wouldn't.

That point is shown in the succeeding verses:

Matthew 10:35-39
"For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household.

"Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

"Those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it."

That TRUTH or FULFILLMENT of the Lord's words has been happening since the time He said them. People have become divided along the line of those who believe in the Lord Jesus and those who do not.

Muslims not accepting the lordship and Godhead of the Lord Jesus is one good example of that. Their insistence that He is not God has SEPARATED them from Christians.

So, the words of the Lord are clearly proven here. It is only unfortunate the Muslims cannot or refuse to see that.

Jeremiah 8:8, Bible corruption confirmed?

MUSLIMS do not seem to run out of verses to distort. Another is Jeremiah 8:8, which supposedly admits that “The Bible has been corrupted.”

This is a distortion because Muslims—as usual—deliberately take the verse out of context to destroy the Bible.

They knowingly leave out the fact that Jeremiah already knew the evil acts of the scribes and was actually exposing it in Jeremiah 8:8.

And since it was already exposed, the supposed corruption has been stopped and prevented from spreading.

Thus, corruption never entered the Bible.

+++

A. MUSLIM DISTORTION

Muslims look for translations that supposedly support their claims. One translation used is the New American Standard Bible which says:

Jeremiah 8:8

"How can you say, `We are wise,
And the law of the LORD is with us'?
But behold, the lying pen of the scribes
Has made it into a lie.

They will then say, “See? The Bible admits that ‘the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.’ This proves corruption in the Bible.”

Did the Bible admit that it has been corrupted?

No. Muslims stop reading and deliberately avoid the following verse.

Jeremiah 8:9
"The wise men are put to shame,
They are dismayed and caught;
Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD,
And what kind of wisdom do they have?

See? Jeremiah 8:9 says the lies of the scribes (wise men) have been “DISMAYED and CAUGHT.”

Their supposed “corruption” has been THWARTED. So, NO CORRUPTION happened in the Word of God.

Muslims, like the lying scribes, “are put to shame.” (Jeremiah 8:9)

+++

B. BIBLE VS QURAN

Muslims are trying to destroy the Bible to promote the Quran. They turn to dirty tricks and distortions because they cannot prove that the Quran is God’s word.

Ask any Muslim to prove that God spoke a word in the Quran. They will avoid the issue because they do not have proof that God said any word in their holy book.

How can they? Islamic teaching says God DID NOT SPEAK the Quran to Muslims—not even to their prophet, Muhammad.

Muslims admit that it was only “Angel Gabriel” who “revealed” the Quran to their prophet. And it was only their prophet who told them the Quran.

Unable to prove the Quran, Muslims turn to spreading lies and distortions against the Bible.

How sad.

Matthew 12:40, Jesus Did Not Die?

ANOTHER verse used by Muslims to “prove” that the Lord Jesus “did not die” is Matthew 12:40. Their point is Jonah did not die inside the fish/whale so the Lord Jesus also did not die.

Sadly, their arguments only show how Muslims deliberately DISTORT and TWIST verses to prove their baseless beliefs.

+++

A. MUSLIMS VS MATTHEW 12:40

Muslims say that in Matthew 12:39, the Lord Jesus gave Jonah as the sign. Then, they cite Matthew 12:40.

The verse reads (from Matthew 12:38):

“Then some of the scribes and Pharisees said to him, ‘Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you.’

“But he answered them, ‘An evil and adulterous generation asks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

“‘For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth.’”

[The story refers to Jonah 1:17, 2:1-15]

Muslims will ask a Christian: “Did Jonah die inside the fish/whale?”

If a Christian says, “Jonah did not die inside the whale,” then the Muslim will jump to the conclusion that “See? Jonah did not die. Since, Jonah is the ‘sign,’ so, Jesus was also saying in Matthew 12:40 that He would not die.”

“Therefore,” Muslims will add, “Jesus did not die.”

They might also say, “That proves that the crucifixion is ‘fiction.’”

The question now is: Are Muslim right?

No. They are wrong, despite their quick twisting of the text.

+++

B. THE TRUTH ABOUT JONAH AS THE ‘SIGN’

A careful reading of Matthew 12:40 will reveal that Jonah is NOT the sign. The sign is the PERIOD OF TIME that he remained in the belly of the fish or whale.

Matthew 12:40 reads:

“‘For JUST AS Jonah WAS THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS in the belly of the sea monster, so FOR THREE DAYS and THREE NIGHTS the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth.’”

The sign was the “three days and three nights” or the time Jonah was in the fish/whale, and not his condition inside the creature.

So, it was not important whether Jonah was alive or dead. That was not the issue. That was not the sign.

Muslims are just playing a quick trick, a sleight of hand, like a magician or a con man fooling his audience. And they have been successful in deceiving many innocent or unsuspecting people.

+++

C. THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS

But beware, some Muslims do not stop after their trick is exposed. To elude the expose, they will shift the attention to whether the Lord Jesus “literally” used the sign of Jonah.

They back away from their claim that the Lord Jesus did not die, and now try to prove that the Bible is wrong or contradictory.

They might ask, “Did Jesus really stay in the tomb for three days and three nights, just as Jonah did in the fish?”

Again, this is trickery.

To the Hebrews or Jews, the phrase “three days and three nights” is NOT LITERAL. It is not three 24 hour days (12 hours day and 12 hours night) for a total of 72 hours. It is an idiom, which is more symbolical than literal.

And to them, it only signifies that an event (eg Jonah inside the fish or the time the Lord Jesus stayed in the grave) encompasses three days. Thus, even if the Lord Jesus stayed only a few hours of Friday, the whole day of Saturday and a few hours of Sunday in the grave, that already fulfills the idiom. He has remained in the grave for “three days and three nights.”

Muslims know that most Christians do not know the real meaning of “three days and three nights.” So, they capitalize on that lack of knowledge as they try to show that the Bible is either wrong or contradictory.

Now we know their trick.

1Chronicles 18:4 vs 2Samuel 8:4? Bakit magkaiba ang bilang ng mangangabayo?

DALAWA pang HINDI NAIINTINDIHAN na TALATA ng mga MUSLIM ay ang 1Chronicles 18:4 at 2Samuel 8:4 na AKALA NILA ay MAGKASALUNGAT.

WALANG MAGKASALUNGAT DIYAN. MAGKAIBA LANG ang PAGKAKA-ULAT ng mga NAGSULAT ng MGA TALATA.

ETO ang PROOF.

1Chronicles 18:4
David took from him one thousand chariots, seven thousand cavalry, and twenty thousand foot soldiers. David hamstrung all the chariot horses, but left one hundred of them.

2Samuel 8:4
David took from him one thousand seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand foot soldiers. David hamstrung all the chariot horses, but left enough for a hundred chariots.

WALANG KONTRAHAN DIYAN. MAGKAIBA LANG ang PAGKAKA-ULAT.

ETO ang PANSININ MO.

1Chr 18:4
Chariots = 1,000
Cavalry = 7,000
Foot soldiers = 20,000

2Sam 8:4
Chariots = 0
Horsemen = 1,700
Foot soldiers = 20,000

MAS MARAMING CAVALRY sa 1CHR 18:4 dahil BINILANG DIYAN ang mga TAUHAN ng 1,000 CHARIOT. Sa BAWAT CHARIOT ay MAY 5 HANGGANG 6 na TAO. Kaya MAY SOBRANG 5,300 NA TAO.

So, ang 1,700 na HORSEMEN sa 2SAM 8:4 ay NADAGDAGAN ng 5,300 na KASAMA sa 1,000 CHARIOT na BINANGGIT sa 1CHR 18:4.

WALANG KONTRAHAN. HINDI LANG TAMA ang PAGBASA NG MGA MUSLIM sa SINASABI ng BIBLE kaya MALI ang UNAWA NILA.

Matthew 15:9, Christians believe in man-made teachings?

MUSLIMS cite MATTHEW 15:9 to claim that the LORD JESUS SCOLDED CHRISTIANS for believing in MAN-MADE TEACHINGS.

MUSLIMS are WRONG. MATTHEW 15:9 DOES NOT REFER to CHRISTIANS.

And if WE BELIEVE MUSLIM TEACHINGS about MUHAMMAD, the VERSE REFERS to THEIR PROPHET and TO THEM.

+++

MATTHEW 15:9 reads:

"in vain do they worship me, teaching human precepts as doctrines.'"

MUSLIMS say that the LORD JESUS was TALKING to Christians who WORSHIP HIM. The LORD JESUS is supposedly telling Christians that their worship of the LORD JESUS is a mere "human precept" taught by men.

The CLAIM of MUSLIM only SHOW their LACK of UNDERSTANDING of the VERSE, which THEY are READING IT OUT OF CONTEXT.

READ the CONTEXT, staring MATTHEW 15:1, and YOU WILL SEE that the LORD JESUS was NOT TALKING TO CHRISTIANS but to JEWISH PHARISEES and SCRIBES.

MATTHEW 15:1 says:

Then PHARISEES and SCRIBES came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands before they eat."

The JEWISH LEADERS were QUESTIONING the LORD JESUS about the ACTIONS of HIS DISCIPLES who were “break[ing] the tradition of the elders.”

It was to that which the Lord Jesus RESPONDED and SAID MATTHEW 15:9, or MATTHEW 15:7-9.

"You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied rightly about you when he said: 'This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching human precepts as doctrines.'"

So, MATTHEW 15:9 is NOT ABOUT CHRISTIANS but ABOUT JEWISH PHARISEES and SCRIBES (read MATTHEW 15:1)

The LORD JESUS was CRITICIZING THEM for their FALSE WORSHIP of GOD and by "teaching human precepts as doctrines."

+++

But by the ADMISSION of MUSLIMS, THEY are also ACKNOWLEDGING that MATTHEW 15:9 also REFERS to them, ESPECIALLY THEIR PROPHET MUHAMMAD.

Why?

The LORD JESUS QUOTED MATTHEW 15:9 (or the ENTIRE VERSE of MATTHEW 15:7-9) from Isaiah 29:13.

ISAIAH 29:13 says:
”Because these people draw near with their mouths and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their worship of me is a human commandment learned by rote;”

Isaiah 29:13 refers to the PRECEDING VERSE, ISAIAH 29:12, which talks of a MAN or MEN who "CANNOT READ."

ISAIAH 29:12
”And if it is given to those who cannot read, saying, "Read this," they say, "We cannot read."

MUSLIMS say that this MAN who "CANNOT READ" in ISAIAH 29:12 is THEIR PROPHET MUHAMMAD, which is in reference to SAHIH BUKHARI BOOK 1:3.

Part of SAHIH BUKHARI BOOK 1:3 says:
”The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, "I do not know how to read. The Prophet added, "The angel caught me (forcefully) and pressed me so hard that I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read and I replied, 'I do not know how to read.' Thereupon he caught me again and pressed me a second time till I could not bear it any more. He then released me and again asked me to read but again I replied, 'I do not know how to read (or what shall I read)?'”

So, by saying that MUHAMMAD is the PERSON REFERRED TO in ISAIAH 29:12, MUSLIMS are ADMITTING that it is MUHAMMAD whom ISAIAH 29:13 SAYS as "teaching human precepts as doctrines."

Therefore, BY THE ADMISSION and CLAIM of MUSLIMS, THEY are SAYING that MATTHEW 15:9 IS ABOUT THEM and THEIR PROPHET—NOT ABOUT CHRISTIANS.

Crucifixion: Friday or Wednesday?

SUMMARY:

ITINUTURO ni Eliseo Soriano, founder at pinuno ng Ang Dating Daan (ADD) at Members Church of God International (MCGI) na Mierkules napako at namatay sa krus ang Panginoong Hesus.

Mali po ang aral na iyan.

Una, ang sabi sa Bibliya ay SABBATH o SABADO ang kasunod ng araw nung namatay ang Panginoon. 


Kung Mierkules namatay si Kristo, ang kasunod na araw ay HUWEBES. Obviously, ang HUWEBES po ay HINDI SABADO, HINDI SABBATH.


Ang pinaninindigan ni Soriano at Dbase ay ang paniniwala nila na ang kasunod na araw ay ang Unang Araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura.


Anila, ang Unang Araw daw ng pista na iyan ay isang "Sabbath" o "high Sabbath."


MALI po. Hindi po Sabbath ang Unang Araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura. Walang Hudyo na magsasabi na iyan ay Sabbath, kaya po malinaw na HINDI ALAM ni SORIANO ang kanyang sinasabi.



Ayon sa Bibliya, namatay ang Panginoong Hesus sa araw ng "Paghahanda" o PARASKEUE sa wikang Griego. Sa Ingles, ang katumbas na salita ng  Paraskeue ay FRIDAY.

So, Bibliya po mismo ang nagsasabi na BIERNES ipinako sa krus si Kristo at BIERNES Siya namatay doon.


Makikita rin po sa kasaysayan na ang Panginoong Hesus ay namatay noong April 1, 33AD, isang BIERNES. Sa kalendaryo ng mga Hudyo, iyan ay Nisan 14, 3793, at iyan po ay araw ng PASSOVER o PASKUWA.


Alam po natin na NAMATAY si Kristo sa Araw ng PASKUWA dahil ang HULING HAPUNAN na kinain Niya kasama ang Kanyang mga alagad ay isang PASSOVER MEAL.

Isa pa pong patunay na BIERNES (April 1, 33AD o Nisan 14, 3793) namatay ang Kristo ay ang katuparan ng John 19:31. Ayon po riyan, ang SABBATH (SABADO) na kasunod ng Biernes na iyan ay isang "high day."


Noon pong April 2, 33AD, o Nisan 15, 3793, ang SABADO ay isang "high day" dahil NAGSABAY ang paggunita sa araw ng Sabbath at ang paggunita sa Unang Araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura.

Tulad po ng sinabi na natin sa itaas, ang mismong Unang Araw ng pista ay HINDI SABBATH. Pero dahil sumabay po iyan sa isang LINGGUHANG SABBATH o SABADO ay naiangat niyan ang uri ng Sabbath na iyon kaya nagi iyong "high Sabbath."

FULL ARTICLE

NOON pa man pong nagkatawang tao ang Panginoong Hesus ay NAGBABALA na SIYA laban sa mga BULAANG PROPETA at BULAANG MANGANGARAL. (Matthew 24:4-5, 11, 24)

Sa Acts of the Apostles (20:28) ay sinabi na ang mga BULAAN ay MAGBABALUKTOT sa KATOTOHANAN. At sa Galatians 1:8 ay sinasabi na ang mga BULAAN ay MAGTUTURO ng EBANGHELYO na IBA sa IPINANGARAL ng mga APOSTOL.

Kamakailan ay NAKAUSAP KO ang isang NAGPAKILALANG DBASE. ALAGAD siya ni ELISEO SORIANO, ang FOUNDER at PINUNO ng ANG DATING DAAN (ADD) at MEMBERS CHURCH OF GOD INTERNATIONAL (MCGI).

Isa po sa mga NATALAKAY NAMIN  ay ang ARAW ng PAGKAMATAY ng PANGINOONG HESUS. At ayon sa NATUTUNAN ni DBASE kay SORIANO, MIERKULES NAMATAY si KRISTO, bagay na IBANG-IBA sa ITINURO sa ATIN na BIERNES PUMANAW ang PANGINOON.

May batayan ba ang paniniwala nina SORIANO at DBASE na MIERKULES o WEDNESDAY NAMATAY si KRISTO at HINDI BIERNES tulad ng NOON PA NATING PINANINIWALAAN?

Basahin po natin ang mga pertinenteng sinabi ni DBASE sa POST NIYA sa COMMENTS ng ARTIKULO NATIN na "HUDYO ALAM NA HINDI LITERAL ANG 3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHTS." Iyan po ay sa ARAW at ORAS na "dBaseApr 21, 2012 06:39 AM"

Sabi ni DBASE:

Salamat po sa sagot ninyo. So 33 years old namatay si Cristo ayon sa inyo. Naniniwala akong tama iyan. Namatay kasi si Cristo sa araw ng Wednesday, Nisan 14 30AD. Feast of the Passover. Ibig sabihin isinilang Siya noong 4BC at possible ngang namatay si Herod nang 1BC.


Bakit po ito Araw ng Paskua o Nisan 14? Kasi po ayon kay Juan, kinabukasan ay araw ng Sabbath at dakila ang araw ng Sabbath na iyon.

Ang mga Judio nga, sapagka't noo'y Paghahanda, upang ang mga katawan ay huwag mangatira sa krus sa sabbath (sapagka't dakila ang araw ng sabbath na yaon)…--Jn. 19:31

Bakit po dakila ang Sabbath na pinaghahandaan dito? Kasi po iyon ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura.


Pitong araw na pista ito at ang una at huling araw nito ay great Sabbath o high Sabbath.


Kaya po nagmamadali sila sa pagkuha kay Cristo sa krus at nalibing si Cristo bago matapos ang Wednesday at bumangon ng Saturday sundown. Kaya pagdating nila Maria ng bukang liwayway ng Linggo ay wala na si Cristo doon.


Hindi ba kayo nagtataka ang nakasulat sa Luc. 23:56 ay:

At sila'y nagsiuwi, at nangaghanda ng mga pabango at mga unguento. At nang araw ng sabbath sila'y nangagpahinga ayon sa utos.

Dito umuwi sila at naghanda na ng mga pabango at saka nagpahinga pagdating ng Sabbath, samantalang sa Mar. 16:1 naman ay:

At nang makaraan ang sabbath, si Maria Magdalena, at si Mariang ina ni Santiago, at si Salome, ay nagsibili ng mga pabango, upang sila'y magsiparoon at siya'y pahiran.

Dito naman, tapos na ang Sabbath nang sila ay nagsibili ng pabango. Anong masasabi mo?


Umaayon po ito sa panahong may dalawang Sabbath na sangkot, isang high Sabbath at isang Sabado o ordinary Sabbath.


Kaya po sang ayon ako na sa araw ng paghahanda namatay si Cristo kaya nga lang ay hindi ito Friday. Very timely naman dahil sumabay ang pagkamatay Niya sa Araw ng Paskua kung saan si Cristo ang representasyon ng lahat ng korderong pinatay tuwing darating ang Nisan 14. Si Cristo po kasi ang Cordero.

3 DAYS AND 3 NIGHTS

Ang paniniwala po nina Soriano at Dbase sa Mierkules ay batay na rin sa LITERAL nilang unawa sa sinasabi ng Matthew 12:40.

For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth.

Ayun, "three days and three nights" daw mananatili sa puso ng lupa ang Anak ng Tao kaya tama lang daw na Mierkules siya namatay.

Kung bibilang nga naman ay Mierkules nang hapon hanggang Huwebes nang hapon ay isang araw; Huwebes nang hapon hanggang Biernes nang hapon ay dalawang araw; at Biernes nang hapon hanggang Sabado nang hapon ay ikatlong araw.

Parang tama nga, di po ba?

SABADO BA NABUHAY MULI SI KRISTO?

May malalaking problema lang po sa paniniwala nilang literal sa "three days and three nights."

1. Lalabas na Sabado nabuhay muli ang Panginoong Hesus at hindi Linggo. Sasalungat iyan sa paniniwala mula pa noong una na Linggo ang Araw ng Muling Pagkabuhay.

Diyan ay makikita na BAGO at IBANG GOSPEL na naman po ang itinuturo nina Soriano at Dbase. (Galatians 1:8)

2. Wala pong historical record na makikita na Mierkules nga napako at namatay sa krus ang Panginoong Hesus. Lahat ng patotoo ng mga sinaunang Kristiyano ay Biernes namatay ang Kristo.

Lalabas na ang Mierkules ay isang makabagong imbensyon na walang suporta mula sa mga nabuhay noong unang panahon.

3. Lalabas na HINDI NAUUNAWAAN ni Soriano at ng kanyang tagasunod ang tamang kahulugan ng "3 days and 3 nights" ayon sa kaisipan ng mga Hudyo.

Mabubulgar na ang nagpapakilalang mga "pantas" ay mga wala pala talagang alam.

HINDI LITERAL NA 3 DAYS AT 3 NIGHTS

Hindi po literal ang "3 days and 3 nights." Iyan po ay kawikaan lang ng mga Hebreo na ang kahulugan ay "sumasakop sa tatlong araw." Hindi kailangang tatlong araw at tatlong gabi, o literal na 72 oras. Kahit bahagi lang ng isang araw ay maituturing na ng mga Hebreo o Hudyo bilang isang buong araw at gabi.

Para po sa mas malawak at kumpletong paliwanag ay paki CLICK po at paki basa nang sunod-sunod ang mga link na ito:

1. 3 Days and 3 Nights literal ba?

2. 3 Days and 3 Nights Literal Ba? (2)

3. Hudyo Alam na Hindi Literal ang 3 Days and 3 Nights

Diyan po ay malinaw nating makikita na MALING-MALI ang itinuturo ni Eliseo Soriano sa kanyang mga alagad kaya naman MALING-MALI rin ang natututunan ng mga tagasunod niya.

Sa halip na ituro sa matuwid at tamang daan ay inililigaw ni Soriano ang kanyang mga alagad at inihuhulog sa hukay. (Luke 6:39)

NANGARAL BANDANG EDAD 30

Para po isulong ang paniniwala nila na Mierkules namatay ang Panginoong Hesus ay sinimulan ni Dbase ang pahayag niya sa pagsasabi na 33 anyos namatay ang Kristo. 

At batay sa tantiya niya na 4BC isinilang ang Panginoon ay sinabi ni Dbase na 30AD namatay ang Panginoong Hesus.

Generally, ang  PANANINIWALA po ay 33 ANYOS si KRISTO nung Siya ay NAMATAY. Pero dapat pong tandaan na ESTIMATE LANG iyan.


Sa mismo pong pahayag ni Lukas--kung saan ibinatay ang paniniwala na 33 anyos ang Panginoon nung Siya ay mamatay--ay HINDI EKSAKTO ang ibinigay na edad ng manunulat kundi ESTIMATE din lang.


Sabi sa Luke 3:23

Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli...

Paki pansin po ang salitang "about" (Greek "hosei). Iyan po ay pagpapakita na ESTIMATE o TANTIYA LANG ang edad ni Hesus na "thirty." Ibig sabihin po ay maaaring 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 Siya nung magsimula Siyang mangaral.


Kung 27 nagsimulang mangaral si Kristo ay maaring 30 anyos Siya nung mamatay. Kung 33 naman ay maaaring namatay Siya sa edad na 36. Pero tulad nga po ng sabi ko, ESTIMATE LANG iyan.

Ang mahalaga po ay alam natin na nangaral ang Panginoong Hesus at Siya ay ipinako sa krus at namatay para sa ating kaligtasan.

BIERNES SABI NG BIBLIYA

Pero tama po ba ang itinuturo ni Soriano na MIERKULES namatay ang Panginoon?

MALI po.

Sabi sa Matthew 27:62, Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54, John 19:31 at 42 ay "PREPARATION" day NAMATAY si KRISTO.

Sa ORIHINAL na GRIEGO, ang salitang ginamit para sa "PREPARATION" ay "PARASKEUE." Ayon sa STRONG'S GREEK LEXICON o DICTIONARY, Number 3904, ang KAHULUGAN ng PARASKEUE ay:

paraskeué: preparation, the day of preparation (for a Sabbath or feast)

Original Word: παρασκευή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: paraskeué
Phonetic Spelling: (par-ask-yoo-ay')
Short Definition: the day before the Sabbath
Definition: the day of preparation, the day before the Sabbath, Friday.

KITA po NINYO?

Ang KATUMBAS ng salitang "PARASKEUE" o "PREPARATION" ay FRIDAY o BIERNES, HINDI MIERKULES.

Iyan po ang MISMONG SABI ng BIBLIYA at ng mga NAGSURI sa BIBLIYA.

Kaya po ITONG ARAL ni ELISEO SORIANO na MIERKULES NAMATAY ang PANGINOONG HESUS ay MALINAW na isang BAGO at IBANG EBANGHELYO na SALUNGAT sa ITINURO ng mga APOSTOL. (Galatians 1:8)

MALINAW po na sa BULAAN ang ARAL ang ITINUTURO ni SORIANO.

30AD o 33AD?
Although MAY ESTIMATE na 30AD SIYA NAMATAY ay ESTIMATE LANG po IYON.

IN FACT, MAY mga ESTIMATE na 27AD SIYA NAMATAY. At MAYROON din hanggang 36AD.

Pero bakit po itinutulak nina Dbase ang 30AD?

NAGBABATAY po kasi si Soriano at si Dbase sa  maling unawa nila sa John 19:31.


Sabi riyan:

"Ang mga Judio nga, sapagka't noo'y Paghahanda, upang ang mga katawan ay huwag mangatira sa krus sa sabbath (sapagka't dakila ang araw ng sabbath na yaon)."

Kaya po nasabi pa ni Dbase:

"Bakit po dakila ang Sabbath na pinaghahandaan dito? Kasi po iyon ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura.

Pitong araw na pista ito at ang una at huling araw nito ay great Sabbath o high Sabbath."

Ayun, ayon daw sa John 19:31 ay hindi dapat manatili sa krus ang Panginoong Hesus at ang dalawa pang nakapako roon dahil isang "great Sabbath o high Sabbath" ang kasunod na araw.

Tandaan po natin, ang kasunod na araw ay isang "Sabbath."

At ayon sa paniniwala nina Soriano, ang "great Sabbath o high Sabbath" na iyon ay ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura.

Batay po sa kalendaryo ng mga Hudyo, ang Unang Araw ng pista na iyan ay ipinagdiriwang tuwing ika-15 araw ng buwan ng Nisan. (Leviticus 23:6)



HESUS NAPAKO SA ARAW NG PASSOVER O PASKUWA
Kung tutuusin ay tama po na ang kasunod na araw matapos ipako sa krus ang Panginoong Hesus ay unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura, o Nisan 15.

Makikita po natin sa Bibliya na ang Panginoon ay napako sa araw ng PASKUWA o PASSOVER, ang pista ng mga Hudyo na gumugunita sa PAGLILIGTAS ng Diyos sa mga Israelita doon sa Ehipto. (Exodus 12:1-29)

Ayon sa Exodus 12:6 at Leviticus 23:5, ang Paskuwa o Passover ay nagsisimula sa paglubog ng araw ng ika-14 araw ng Nisan. (Dapat po nating maunawaan na ang araw ng mga Hudyo ay nagsisimula sa paglubog ng araw o 6 p.m., kaiba sa sinusunod natin na alas-12 ng hatinggabi nagpapalit ang araw.)

Mababasa po natin sa Luke 22:15 na ang Huling Hapunan (Last Supper) ng Panginoon ay isang Passover Meal, at ito ay sa petsang Nisan 14.

Pagkatapos po ng Last Supper at ng pagdarasal Niya sa Hardin ng Gethsemane ay hinuli na ang Panginoong Hesus, pinahirapan at saka ipinako sa krus kung saan hindi nagtagal ay namatay din po Siya.

So, malinaw po na ang Kristo ay napako at namatay sa krus noong Nisan 14.






WEDNESDAY CRUCIFIXION SUPORTADO NG KASAYSAYAN?
Heto po ang maganda riyan, at dito natin mauunawaan kung bakit pabor si Dbase na 30AD napako sa krus at namatay si Kristo.

Kung ikukumpara natin ang mga petsa sa kalendaryo natin at sa kalendaryo ng mga Hudyo, ang Nisan 14 noong 30AD (3790 sa kalendaryong Hudyo) ay tumapat sa araw ng Mierkules (April 3).


So, batay po riyan ay mukhang tugmang ang paniniwala nila Soriano at Dbase na Mierkules napako sa krus at namatay ang Panginoon.

At kapag isinama pa po natin ang sinasabi nila na literal na tatlong araw at tatlong gabi nasa libingan ang Panginoong Hesus ay tila nga po tumpak ang kanilang paniniwala.

Pero ang sabi sa Bibliya ay araw ng Sabbath ang kasunod na araw matapos mapako sa krus si Kristo. Ang Huwebes na kasunod ng Mierkules ay hindi po araw ng Sabbath.

Ang sagot nina Soriano at Dbase diyan ay isa raw "dakilang Sabbath o high Sabbath" ang kasunod na araw (Nisan 15) dahil iyan daw ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura.


Ayon pa sa kanila, ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura ang Sabbath na tinutukoy sa Bibliya.

Wow! Mukhang may katwiran si Soriano at Dbase para maniwala na Mierkules nga naganap ang Crucifixion at pagkamatay ang Panginoong Hesus.


Ang tanong ay tama nga po ba sila?


HINDI po.



NAILIGAW NG MALING AKALA
Naipakita na po natin sa itaas na ayon mismo sa Bibliya ay BIERNES napako sa krus ang Panginoong Hesus. Patunay riyan ang sinabi ng Bibliya na araw ng PARASKEUE Siya namatay. Ang salitang Greek na PARASKEUE ay BIERNES sa Pilipino at FRIDAY sa Ingles.

Ngayon, ang aral po nina Soriano ay nakatayo sa paniniwala nila na ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura ay isang "dakilang Sabbath o high Sabbath."

Iyan daw po kasi ang Sabbath na tinutukoy sa Bibliya at iyan daw ang dahilan kung bakit hindi dapat manatili sa krus ang Panginoong Hesus. Sabi pa sa John 19:31 ay pinababali na ng mga saserdote ang mga binti ni Kristo para agad na itong mamatay at hindi na abutan ng paglubog ng araw.

Ang tanong po ay "dakilang Sabbath o high Sabbath" po ba ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura"?

HINDI po.



PISTA 'HIGH SABBATH' BA?

Ang UNANG ARAW po ng FEAST OF THE UNLEAVENED BREAD ay HINDI ARAW ng SABBATH, at LALONG HINDI "HIGH SABBATH" o "DAKILANG SABBATH."

Ang PISTA ng UNLEAVENED BREAD ay INIUTOS ng DIYOS sa LEVITICUS 23:6-8.

Heto po ang SINASABI RIYAN:

"At nang ikalabing limang araw ng buwang iyan, ay kapistahan ng tinapay na walang lebadura sa Panginoon: pitong araw na kakain kayo ng tinapay na walang lebadura.

"Sa unang araw ay magkakaroon ng banal na pagpupulong: anomang gawang paglilingkod ay huwag ninyong gagawin.

"Kundi maghahandog kayo sa Panginoon na pitong araw ng handog na pinaraan sa apoy; sa ikapitong araw ay magkakaroon ng banal na pagpupulong anomang gawang paglilingkod ay huwag ninyong gagawin."

MAY NABASA po ba KAYONG IDINEKLARA ng DIYOS na "SABBATH" ang UNA o HULING ARAW ng PISTA ng TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA?

WALA po.

Kasi nga po, HINDI YAN ARAW ng SABBATH.

PISTA, OO. SABBATH, HINDI.

Sa pananampalataya ng mga Hudyo ay may tinatawag na "SPECIAL SABBATHS" o mga araw ng SABBATH (SABADO) na nagaganap bago o kasabay ang isang mahalagang araw. Para po sa listahan ng mga espesyal na Sabbath ng mga Hudyo ay paki click po ang link na ito: "JEWISH SPECIAL SABBATHS"


Ang PISTA NG TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA ay NEVER ITINURING na "SPECIAL SABBATH" o kahit pa "high Sabbath."


Si Soriano, Dbase at iba pang BAGONG LITAW na MANGANGARAL ang naniniwala na "Sabbath" ang unang araw ng pista na iyan.




So, diyan pa lang po ay MALINAW na SABLAY NA ang ITINURO ni SORIANO sa mga tulad ni Dbase.



'NO WORK DAY' SABBATH NA AGAD?


Siguro INAKALA ni SORIANO na "SABBATH" ang PISTA ng TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA dahil IPINAGBAWAL ng DIYOS ang "anomang gawang paglilingkod."

Puwes, HINDI po porke ganyan ay NANGANGAHULUGAN nang SABBATH IYAN. Ang IPINAGBABAWAL LANG po kasi riyan ay ang MGA GAWAING PAGLILINGKOD. Ang IBANG URI ng TRABAHO ay PUWEDE.


Sa ARAW po ng SABBATH ay LAHAT ng URI ng TRABAHO ay BAWAL.

Sabi sa LEVITICUS 23:3

"Anim na araw na gagawa: datapuwa't sa ikapitong araw ay sabbath na takdang kapahingahan, siyang banal na pagpupulong; anomang gawa ay huwag ninyong gagawin: isang sabbath sa Panginoon sa lahat ng inyong tahanan."

KITA po NINYO?

TOTALLY BAWAL ang PAGTATRABAHO. KAHIT nga po MAGLUTO ay BAWAL e.

Sa PISTA ng TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA ay TRABAHO na PAGLILINGKOD LANG PO ang BAWAL. Kumbaga po ay WALA LANG PASOK sa TRABAHO.


Katunayan, sa unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura ay PUWEDENG MAGLUTO o MAGHANDA ng KAKAININ. IBANG-IBA sa SABBATH na TOTALLY NO WORK DAY. KAHIT GAWAING BAHAY ay BAWAL.

So, PAANO po MATATAWAG na "HIGH" o "DAKILANG" SABBATH ang UNANG ARAW ng PISTA ng TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA e MAS MABABA nga ang REQUIREMENTS DIYAN?

Sa madaling salita, MALI po talaga ang batayan ni Soriano ng paniniwala niya na Mierkules napako sa krus at Mierkules namatay ang Panginoong Hesus.





NISAN 15 BAKIT 'HIGH' SABBATH?
Ngayon, dalawang tanong po ang dapat nating sagutin:

1. BAKIT po ba TINAWAG na "HIGH" o "DAKILA" ang SABBATH na KASUNOD ng PAGKAPAKO at PAGKAMATAY ng PANGINOONG HESUS?

2. KAILAN po ba iyang "HIGH" na Sabbath na iyan?





Una, tinawag pong "high" o "dakila" o "great" ang Sabbath na iyan dahil mismong  ARAW iyan ng LINGGUHANG SABBATH ng mga Hudyo na nasa IKAPITONG ARAW.

Pangalawa, SUMABAY po RIYAN ang UNANG ARAW ng PISTA ng TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA (Nisan 15).

Kumbaga, DOUBLE CELEBRATION ang MERON sa ARAW na IYAN:

Araw ng Sabbath + Unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura = 'High' Sabbath

So, espesyal po talaga ang Sabbath na iyan.

At kung pagbabatayan po natin ang listahan ng mga "Special Sabbaths" ng mga Hudyo, maaari po nating ituring ang "high" Sabbath na iyan bilang "SHABBAT CHOL HAMOED PESACH" o "SABBATH OF THE INTERMEDIATE DAYS." Naganap po kasi ang Sabbath na iyan sa GITNA ng pagdiriwang ng PISTA ng PASSOVER kung saan kabilang ang Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura. 




Ang tanong po ngayon ay KAILAN NANGYARI ang SABBATH kung saanSUMABAY ang UNANG ARAW NG PISTA ng TINAPAY na WALANG LEBADURA?


Nangyari po iyan noong April 2, 33AD, (Nisan 15, 3793) ang taon na pinaniniwalaan ng mga Katoliko kung kailan napako sa krus at namatay ang Panginoong Hesus.

At dahil nangyari nga na ang unang araw ng Pista ng Tinapay na Walang Lebadura (Nisan 15) ay naganap ng SABADO, malinaw na ang Nisan 14 (Passover)--kung kailan napako sa krus at namatay si Kristo--ay araw ng BIERNES.






FRIDAY CRUCIFIXION PROVEN AGAIN
So, MATATAG na MATATAG po ang paniniwala ng mga Katoliko na BIERNES nga ipinako sa krus at namatay ang Panginoong Hesu Kristo.


1. Biernes sabi ng Bibliya


2. Biernes ayon sa kasaysayan



Dahil po riyan, SABLAY na SABLAY ang ITINURO sa INYO ni SORIANO na MIERKULES NAMATAY ang PANGINOONG HESUS.

WALA pong GANYAN. HAKA-HAKA at GUNI-GUNI lang po iyan ng ILANG BAGONG LITAW na MANGANGARAL. (MATTHEW 24:4-5, 11, 24) KASAMA na po itong si SORIANO.