What's wrong with the Jewish God?

[bananabrain]

"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". [Jeremiah. 8:8]

In the above verse, the Prophet Jeremiah scolded the Israelites that their corrupt scribes made the Law of the Lord [the Torah] into a lie by their 'lying pen' [that is the pen they used to change the verses].

and what is your evidence, abdullah, that jeremiah 8:8 refers to the text that we have now? surely it could just as easily be referring to other versions of the text? the point is that you can't be sure. i am, of course, aware of this verse as being cited as evidence of corruption of the Torah (see http://www.comparative-religion.com/...22lying+pen%22 ) but there are many ways to understand this verse and the one you have picked is by no means the most reliable, though it may well be the most convenient for you.

The Holy Quran does not support the claim that the previous Scriptures remain undistorted:

but, as i have said before, the fact that the Qur'an says something doesn't make it evidence for me.

there are no contradictions in the Holy Quran whatsoever. There are some 'percieved contradictions' that can be explained adequately and in a logical way when they are put into context with other verses and hadiths.

so clearly there are contradictions in the Qur'an which have to be reconciled in a similar way that contradictions in other texts are reconciled.

The contradictions in the Bible and the Torah are distinct contradictions that cannot be explained in a logical way.

we have just as many "perceived contradictions that can be explained adequately and in a logical way when they are put into context with other verses and the Oral Law" for all the objections you point to above. you just don't happen to know what they are, mate. so you can't tell me that what goes for the Qur'an doesn't go for the Torah just as well when you have no idea about how Torah actually works. in fact, if you want any of them explained, come on over to the judaism board and just ask, mr clever-pants.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[inhumility]

Originally Posted by Karimarie

Not all 'prophets' can be accepted as legitimate.

Sorry, my computer was out of order and I could not attend this post earlier.

Right, the prophets have to be according to the Criteria set by God in the Revealed Book. If the claimant is truthful in God’s eyes then that claimant has to be accepted by the people to whom he was sent. If people make false excuses in denying him, they would incur wrath of God, as the claimant has not come by his own, he has been sent by God. This also entails that the people should be polite to him as he is not a culprit to be judged by the people, in fact that truthful claimant is to judge them.

Originally Posted by Karimarie

In principle, anyone can have a vision and claim to be a prophet. Many 'prophets' have aspired to this title, for example:
Aleister Crowley
The Oracle at Delphi
Joseph Smith
David Berg
Sun Myung Moon
Jehovah's Witnesses
Nostradamus
And many, many others...
The fact is, a person cannot be legitimately termed a 'prophet' based on his or her own testimony.

Right, merely by seeing a vision or two does not make one a prophet. In religious terminology the prophet is a person who has been
1. chosen by God through clear Revelation from God
2. guided by God, through frequent Revelations from God
3. for guidance of the people, for which he has a mandate from God that is why he is also called Messenger of God or the Guided One as he is provided guidance whenever needed.
I therefore, mention hereunder Criteria of a true prophet of God from the OT believed by both Jews, Christians and NT believed by Christians. Quran also has the similar view in this regard.
1. Deuteronomy 18:20
20But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
2. Jeremiah 14:14-16
14Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.
15Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning the prophets that prophesy in my name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land; By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed.
16And the people to whom they prophesy shall be cast out in the streets of Jerusalem because of the famine and the sword; and they shall have none to bury them, them, their wives, nor their sons, nor their daughters: for I will pour their wickedness upon them.
3. Deuteronomy 13:5
5And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
4. Ezekiel 13:9-13
9And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies: they shall not be in the assembly of my people, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know that I am the Lord GOD.
10Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter:
11Say unto them which daub it with untempered morter, that it shall fall: there shall be an overflowing shower; and ye, O great hailstones, shall fall; and a stormy wind shall rend it.
12Lo, when the wall is fallen, shall it not be said unto you, Where is the daubing wherewith ye have daubed it?
13Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; I will even rend it with a stormy wind in my fury; and there shall be an overflowing shower in mine anger, and great hailstones in my fury to consume it.
5. There is mention of false prophets in Acts 5:36-37
36For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.
37After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.
These false prophets were not chosen by God so they got killed and their followers got scattered frustrated and disappointed. The first one was Theudas and other one was Judas of Galilee

If I have missed something, please suggest for addition or correction.

My point is that Jewish and Muslim God is One, the difference is in the attributes. To send Prophets or Messengers or Guided Ones is a permanent attribute of God.

The Jews should have accepted Jesus as a true prophet of God and Muhammad also, as they fit in the above Criteria and also Mirza Ghulam Ahmad as the Messiah/Moshiach or the Guided-One to come in the latter-days.

[Karimarie]

Originally Posted by inhumility

My point is that Jewish and Muslim God is One,

No one has claimed differently. I've never met a Jew that actually understands the ideas presented in Islam that denies that fact because it's so very obvious.

Originally Posted by inhumility

the difference is in the attributes.

'Attributes'? What 'attributes'?

Originally Posted by inhumility

To send Prophets or Messengers or Guided Ones is a permanent attribute of God.

And yet, you claim Mohammed was the Final Prophet, ie the Seal of the Prophets--Which is it? Was Mohammed the Final Prophet or is God still sending prophets today?

Originally Posted by inhumility

The Jews should have accepted Jesus as a true prophet of God

No, because by that logic Jews should accept Hillel I, Gamliel and Akiva as prophets too, as Jesus's philosophy was really nothing new in Jewish thought, having been developed almost entirely by his Pharisaic predecessors.

Originally Posted by inhumility

and Muhammad also,

Putting aside your religious reasons in demanding acceptance of Mohammed as a prophet, ie. your claim Islam is inherently superior to all other faiths, is there actually a reason you can cite?

I can cite the fact that Mohammed wasn't a Jew as valid evidence that he wasn't, what can you cite as evidence he was?

[bananabrain]

don't worry about muhammad and jesus, karimarie, because apparently we have someone far more important to accept, namely mirza ghulam ahmad, who is apparently the moshiach. although i might point out that the latter claim fails on similar objections to those we have to that of jesus' followers. at least nobody is claiming that muhammad was moshiach, because then we would have a serious problem, as opposed to this utter nonsense.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[inhumility]

Originally Posted by Karimarie

'Attributes'? What 'attributes'?

As already written by me in an earlier post Muslims and Jews differ in the application of attributes of God. It is an attribute of God that he guides his people and has not left the humans to drift away from the truthful path. Like He has been sending Guided Ones previously i.e. Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Solomon etc, so this attribute of God is clearly manifest, I think in principle you would agree on that.

Originally Posted by Karimarie

Putting aside your religious reasons in demanding acceptance of Mohammed as a prophet

Presently I have only described my views frankly on the issue; I am not demanding you to convert to Islam, if you have gathered that from my post, please correct it now.

In my response to your post I agreed with you that there are many claimants of prophet-hood and we cannot accept them just for their claims; we can accept them if it is in principle correct to do so. I then narrated some of the Criteria as mentioned in Bible to which Quran also conforms. Presently I request you to please see if the Criteria is correct; and if not please mention the correct Criteria of knowing a true prophet from the untrue. That would be a true and principled stance for our meaningful discussion. Please don’t mind and remain firm on your faith, like I am.
Thanks for your polite response.

[The Lord]

Originally Posted by Karimarie

Heretical rabbi, probably not. He was a Galilean, a group of people who while Jews were forcefully convereted only a generation before. They were nationalists, but not religious (like the early secular Zionists, actually). It's reasonable to believe that, like many other Galileans of the time, he strongly supported his people but did so in ways that were very different from Jewish history and tradition due simply to lack of knowledge thereof. (The information would not have been imparted by his parents because they likely didn't know it themselves).

This is very interesting. Could you please expand and clarify this explanation since it is different from the common version of the history as advanced by Christianity. Maybe you, or others, have done that before. If so, please point me to the location on this site or elsewhere. It might also be worth it to start a new thread with this topic. Thanks.