Open question: How does Christianity explain Islam from prophecy standpoint?
ReligionDiscuss General Theology, Religions and Denominations, God's Attributes, Predestination and Free Will, Dispensationalism, Eschatology, Philosophy, Origins, Archaeology, Science, World History and other such topics.
All it takes is half a brain and a good understanding of the English language to read the bible.. its all there in black and white.
Daniel has been fullfilled and so has Revelations... which is pretty much the historical view Christians held for centuries.
Futurists like you arose in the 1700-1800's and the eschatology was invented by pretty unscrupulous men like Darby and Schofield (an adulteror and convicted thief who spent time in prison).
It boggles my mind how people love to turn the bible into some sort of National Inquirer to satisfy their desire for sensationalism. The only early church father that might possibly support Iraneous... but we know he was wrong on many things... and I wouldn't build my entire understanding of prophesy on what he had to say.. after all the scriptures warn us about the likes of him.
This is not accurate. Pre-mill. was the early view until Augustine/amill., etc. Just because a later writer popularized or emphasized a biblical truth does not mean it was invented by Darby, etc.
Know God and make Him known! (YWAM)
They said: "Where is the God of Elijah?"
I say: "Where are the Elijahs of God?" (Ravenhill "Why Revival Tarries")
Slogan/motto:
For as much as it depends on you, live at peace with others.
Reputation:
July 21st, 2010, 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by godrulz
This is not accurate. Pre-mill. was the early view until Augustine/amill., etc. Just because a later writer popularized or emphasized a biblical truth does not mean it was invented by Darby, etc.
I'm sorry.. but its the absolute truth... you have just spun history in your favor to support the imaginings of 2 mad men... you have been trolled and took the bait hook, line and sinker.
You have much in common with the Cathoics... whether you want to believe it or not...
Slogan/motto:
There is no deity except God and Muhammad is the messenger of God
Reputation:
July 21st, 2010, 03:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazaroo
Again you show you are just a poor reader with low comprehension:
His full name, Allenby, (not 'nabi') = "Alla- Nebi" 'God-prophet'.
If you mean Allah Nabi, it would mean "God is a prophet", not "God's prophet". "God's prophet" would be Nabi'ullah. And either way Allah Nabi doesn't sound anything like Allenby, except to someone who probably can't pronounce either of them properly. Just to give you a bit of a hint, the second 'a' in Allah is actually a very long and distinct sound, so it should perhaps be transliterated as Allaah, and it's like the 'a' in car, not the 'a' in cat, and the double 'l' is actually a double 'l' not like the 'll' in Allenby. To transliterate it properly would be like this: Ul-Laah Nab-y, which is not even remotely anything like Allenby, and even if it were it means "God is a prophet" LOL.
To my ear, Allenby perhaps sounds remotely close to al-Nabi (the prophet), but even that is a very far stretch since the 'l' should be assimilated to the 'n' so it should be an-Nabi.
In short, Allenby doesn't mean God's prophet. Forget the fact you haven't even given evidence of where any Arabs supposedly believed this anyway.
None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for his own self - Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)
If you mean Allah Nabi, it would mean "God is a prophet", not "God's prophet". "God's prophet" would be Nabi'ullah. And either way Allah Nabi doesn't sound anything like Allenby, except to someone who probably can't pronounce either of them properly. Just to give you a bit of a hint, the second 'a' in Allah is actually a very long and distinct sound, so it should perhaps be transliterated as Allaah, and it's like the 'a' in car, not the 'a' in cat, and the double 'l' is actually a double 'l' not like the 'll' in Allenby. To transliterate it properly would be like this: Ul-Laah Nab-y, which is not even remotely anything like Allenby, and even if it were it means "God is a prophet" LOL.
To my ear, Allenby perhaps sounds remotely close to al-Nabi (the prophet), but even that is a very far stretch since the 'l' should be assimilated to the 'n' so it should be an-Nabi.
In short, Allenby doesn't mean God's prophet. Forget the fact you haven't even given evidence of where any Arabs supposedly believed this anyway.
...quibble quibble. Who cares if "Allenby" doesn't sound exactly like "The Prophet" or "God (is) a Prophet".
The fact is, Allenby kicked the Turks ***** and they ran like little mouse-men just like they did in the Gulf War (I and II). Lets face it, the British kick *** everywhere, just like they did in the Falklands.
The bottom line is this: The age-old prophecy which says "You shall control the Gates of your Enemies" has stood since the British Empire was founded.
We control, lets see: The St Lawrence, the Northwest Passage, the Alaska/Russia Straight, the Rock of Gibraltar, the Panama Canal (which the West built), the Suez, the Gulf of Hormuz, Australia, New Zealand, the Phillipines, both Horns (Africa and South America), and even the Istanbul Canal. Yep I think thats every major gate for every major shipping route in the world,...
So yeah, the British are the Ten Lost Tribes: Live with it.
peace
Nazaroo
3.Thou SHALL NOTbe...disruptive. ... We will ban you
5. Thou SHALL NOT hijack threads or be a "thread pest" 7. Thou SHALL NOT troll our forums. 10. ... personal comments may also cause banishment.
Forget the fact you haven't even given evidence of where any Arabs supposedly believed this anyway.
That's a good point, Abu.
Roo, do you have any valid historical evidence for this claim, or are you just pulling it out of thin air (or getting it from someone else who pulled it out of thin air)?
This issue is all the more odd considering that nobody's math adds up to anything that makes any sense. I realize there are those coins and that's the best evidence, but even so, the numbers still don't add up.
Last edited by Paulos; July 21st, 2010 at 06:38 PM.
Roo, do you have any valid historical evidence for this claim, or are you just pulling it out of thin air (or getting it from someone else who pulled it out of thin air)?
As you yourself say below: "those coins...the best evidence".
Quote:
This issue is all the more odd considering that nobody's math adds up to anything that makes any sense. I realize there are those coins and that's the best evidence, but even so, the numbers still don't add up.
None of those numbers will ever add up. All European Calendars, all Roman, Greek, Jewish, Arabic calendars are all hopelessly jumbled, and have been tampered with and altered repeatedly on numerous occasions.
Lets spell out some reasons why the buffoons here will never sort this out:
(1) all the calendars have been tampered with.
(2) Some of the calendars (especially Middle-Eastern) are following LUNAR MONTHS OF 28 DAYS, not SOLAR years of 365 1/4 days, which is a recent innovation.
There is no point even trying to get those numbers to add up.
Mankind is simply a lousy steward of absolutely everything they are given charge of. (check oil spill)
But incompetent tampering doesn't cover up basic historical facts, because the tamperers don't have the budget, the skill, the self-discipline or the power to cover them up.
The coins are hard evidence, and they aren't going away...ever.
Nor is General Allenby's victory over the Turks in 1917.
peace
Nazaroo
3.Thou SHALL NOTbe...disruptive. ... We will ban you
5. Thou SHALL NOT hijack threads or be a "thread pest" 7. Thou SHALL NOT troll our forums. 10. ... personal comments may also cause banishment.
Last edited by Nazaroo; July 21st, 2010 at 08:41 PM.
As you yourself say below: "those coins...the best evidence".
I get the coin part, but what is the historical proof that the Turks actually knew of and interpreted the prophecy in that way? As you state:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nazaroo
Daniel's prophecy was well-known in Jerusalem at the time of Allenby's advance, and expectations were already high, with excitement among Jews in the Middle East, and concern among muslims at this time...They were spooked by the prophecy, which was discussed in every Turkish coffee house from Jerusalem to Istanbul.
How do you know that? What solid historical proof is there for that claim?
Slogan/motto:
Luther only started the Reformation - We must finish it!
Reputation:
July 21st, 2010, 09:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by godrulz
This is not accurate. Pre-mill. was the early view until Augustine/amill., etc. Just because a later writer popularized or emphasized a biblical truth does not mean it was invented by Darby, etc.
Pre-Mil was the early view until Augustine/ A-Mil? . . . rrrriiiiiiiiiight.
Have you considered the OT church missed the 1st coming of Christ and the NT church missed the 2nd coming as well? Very few took heed to flee Jerusalem when they saw it encompassed by the armies and those who did became isolationists after that with little influence in the thinking of the other movers and shakers of the earliest church. They also had maintained the heresy of the Judaizers which didn't help them gain any credibility. I'm speaking of the Ebionites here.
Have you considered the OT church missed the 1st coming of Christ and the NT church missed the 2nd coming as well?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krsto
You haven't asked yourself the most basic question, "End of what?" It is the end of an era, namely the Old Covenant. Many will say it ended at the cross and for those who believed in Jesus it did in their lives but keep in mind Heb. 8:13 -By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. This indicates the Old Covenant had not disappeared quite yet at the writing of Hebrews but was about to. That happened when God judged Israel via the Roman armies invading and tearing down the temple and killing the priests at 70 AD and thereafter.
We are not still living in the end times. They were over a long time ago.
Yes, thanks for posting. I do find the preterist view to be more compelling than any other interpretation of Bible prophecy. The idea that the prophecies were fulfilled, or were being fulfilled, in the first-to-early second centuries does seem to be confirmed in various other scriptures you listed, such as Matthew 16:28, 24:34, 10:23; Acts 2:16-21; and Rev. 1:1, 22:6.
I do believe that a more spiritual interpretation of Bible prophecy is to be preferred over the literal, dead-letter interpretation (cf. 2 Corinthians 3:6). Every generation since the early church has tried to apply a literal interpretation of the prophecies to world events of the times in which they lived, and they have all been wrong. We see that process continuing to take place today with the likes of Hal Lindsey, Jack Van Impe, and other prophecy hucksters and charlatans who have made themselves a comfortable living by misinterpreting Bible prophecy. Unfortunately, there is no end to the gullible who continue to buy into such nonsense.
Last edited by Paulos; July 22nd, 2010 at 12:34 PM.
Yes, I find the preterist view to be more compelling than any other interpretation of Bible prophecy. Thanks for posting. The idea that the prophecies were fulfilled, or were being fulfilled, in the first-to-early second centuries does seem to be confirmed in various other scriptures you listed, such as Acts 2:16-21; Matthew 16:28, 24:34, 10:23; and Rev. 1:1, 22:6.
I do believe that a more spiritual interpretation of Bible prophecy is to be preferred over the literal interpretation (cf. 2 Corinthians 3:6). Every generation since the early church has tried to apply a literal interpretation of the prophecies to the world events of the times in which they lived, and they have all been wrong. We see that process continuing to take place today with con artists such as Jack Van Impe, Hal Lindsey, and other prophecy hucksters and charlatans who have made themselves filthy rich by misinterpreting Bible prophecy. Unfortunately, there is no end to the gullible who continue to buy into such nonsense.
Impossible for me to say. The preterist view answers many questions, but it doesn't answer all of them, so I'm perfectly willing to accept that Revelation 20 could be referring to an event that has yet to take place. In any case, any prophecy of scripture will be fulfilled only as God alone intends it to be fulfilled. One thing is certain: Prophecy will not be fulfilled according to the private interpretations and whims (2 Peter 1:20-21) of prophecy hucksters, who make merchandise of the Word of God in order to fatten their own bank accounts.
Linear Mode
