John 14:16 “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.” (American Standard Version)

In this verse, Jesus promises that another “Comforter” will appear, and thus, we must discuss some issues concerning this “Comforter.”

The Greek word paravklhtoß, ho parakletos, has been translated as ‘Comforter.’ Parakletos more precisely means ‘one who pleads another’s cause, an intercessor.’[1] The ho parakletos is a person in the Greek language, not an incorporeal entity. In the Greek language, every noun possesses gender; that is, it is masculine, feminine or neutral. In the Gospel of John, Chapters 14, 15 and 16 the ho parakletos is actually a person. All pronouns in Greek must agree in gender with the word to which they refer and the pronoun “he” is used when referring to the parakletos. The NT uses the word pneuma, which means “breath” or “spirit,” the Greek equivalent of ruah, the Hebrew word for “spirit” used in the OT. Pneuma is a grammatically neutral word and is always represented by the pronoun “it.”

All present day Bibles are compiled from “ancient manuscripts,” the oldest dating back the fourth century C.E. No two ancient manuscripts are identical.[2] All Bibles today are produced by combining manuscripts with no single definitive reference. The Bible translators attempt to “choose” the correct version. In other words, since they do not know which “ancient manuscript” is the correct one, they decide for us which “version” for a given verse to accept. Take John 14:26 as an example. John 14:26 is the only verse of the Bible which associates the Parakletos with the Holy Spirit. But the “ancient manuscripts” are not in agreement that the “Parakletos” is the ‘Holy Spirit.’ For instance, the famous Codex Syriacus, written around the fifth century C.E., and discovered in 1812 on Mount Sinai, the text of 14:26 reads; “Paraclete, the Spirit”; and not “Paraclete, the Holy Spirit.”

Why is it important? It is significant because in biblical language a “spirit,” simply means “a prophet.”

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.”[3]

It is instructive to know that several biblical scholars considered parakletos to be an ‘independent salvific (having the power to save) figure,’ not the Holy Ghost.[4]

The question, then, is: was Jesus’ parakletos, Comforter, a ‘Holy Ghost’ or a person - a prophet - to come after him? To answer the question, we must understand the description of ho parakletos and see if it fits a ghost or a human being.

When we continue reading beyond chapter 14:16 and chapter 16:7, we find that Jesus predicts the specific details of the arrival and identity of the parakletos. Therefore, according to the context of John 14 & 16 we discover the following facts.

1. Jesus said the parakletos is a human being:
John 16:13 “He will speak.”

John 16:7 “…for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you.”

It is impossible that the Comforter be the “Holy Ghost” because the Holy Ghost was present long before Jesus and during his ministry.[5]

John 16:13 Jesus referred to the paraclete as ‘he’ and not ‘it’ seven times, no other verse in the Bible contains seven masculine pronouns. Therefore, paraclete is a person, not a ghost.

2. Jesus is called a parakletos:
“And if any man sin, we have an advocate (parakletos) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1 John 2:1)

Here we see that parakletos is a physical and human intercessor.

3. The Divinity of Jesus a later innovation
Jesus was not accepted as divine until the Council of Nicea, 325 CE, but everyone, except Jews, agree he was a prophet of God, as indicated by the Bible:

Matthew 21:11 “...This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.”

Luke 24:19 “...Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people.”

4. Jesus prayed to God for another parakletos:
John 14:16 “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another parakletos.”

==========================

Interesting, let us see what Christians on board have to say about it?

Well, for one thing, this is simply false:

"Why is it important? It is significant because in biblical language a “spirit,” simply means “a prophet.”

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.”[3]"

First, the author says that a spirit is neuter and cannot be a person, a 'he'. Remember that argument. That's the whole first part of the paper.

THEN, he switches his argument around backwards and says that in the Bible, a spirit means a person! And not only a person, but a Man, a prophet! :p

Let's look at the passage from John's first Letter which he quotes:

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1 John 4:1

This passage shows us that spirits, whatever gender they may be in grammar, can tell you things. You have to choose to believe them or not. You have to test them. They don't have bodies, of course, but they are persons.

The part about prophets after the colon doesn't mean that the spirits are prophets, that's silly! The whole passage means this:

"Spirits tell you things. But they don't always tell you true things, so you can't believe all of them. You have to test them to see if they are from God. Some people don't test them properly. They believe lying spirits. These men who believe the lying spirits are false prophets. And many of them have gone out into the world."

This passage tells you to test spirits so that you don't become like the false prophets yourself. It doesn't tell you the spirits are prophets: Which makes nonsense of the author's first argument that a spirit can't be a person because it's neuter in gender.

Anyway, what the next line that your author doesn't quote?

"This is how you can know the Spirit of God: every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ come in the flesh belongs to God,"
1 John 4: 2.

This "coming in the flesh" is a reference to John's point at the beginning of His Gospel, that Christ is God's Word, He is God, Who existed from the beginning of time, Who has come down to earth. "He took flesh and lived among us."

Any spirit that doesn't acknowledge this is...what?

Let's look at the next verse:

"This is the spirit of the antichrist that, as you heard, is to come, but in fact is already in the world."
1 John 4: 3.

So: any spirit that testifes that Jesus is not God is Antichrist, the enemy of God. And anyone listening to such a spirit is: a False Prophet and a servant of Satan, not of God.

This is the point of the passage that your author quotes. But I am afraid it is not a point he agrees with! :p

There is so much wrong with the author's analysis that it's hardly worth arguing with. Does he bother to look at the other references to the Holy Spirit in the New Testament, so he can understand fully? No, because then he would have no argument.

[W]hen [Jesus] had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained."
John 20: 22-23.

I disagree with you Jeff.

Even in the Quran prophet Jesus pbuh was called ruah (spirit) and also angel Jibreal called ruah (spirit) as in below verses:


O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from thy Lord in Truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a Guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims.

And this is same thing:


Take John 14:26 as an example. John 14:26 is the only verse of the Bible which associates the Parakletos with the Holy Spirit. But the “ancient manuscripts” are not in agreement that the “Parakletos” is the ‘Holy Spirit.’ For instance, the famous Codex Syriacus, written around the fifth century C.E., and discovered in 1812 on Mount Sinai, the text of 14:26 reads; “Paraclete, the Spirit”; and not “Paraclete, the Holy Spirit.”

I'm not sure that what you just wrote responds to what I said.

I can't argue about the Quran, but I can talk about normal human usage of the term spirit and the way it is used in the Bible.

If you go through the Bible you will not find any place where a man or woman is clearly referred to as a 'spirit'. 'Spirit' means 'breath'. It is an invisible, animating force. Every human being HAS a spirit; that's what keeps you alive. When you die, your spirit leaves your body. You can see this in many places in the Bible.

As you see, the Holy Spirit is something that can come to you invisibly by simply breathing symbolically as Jesus did.

The spirit of God, according to John who your author quotes, is God Himself.

God is a Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth.
1 John 4: 24.

You believe in the Quran so you can start there and reason from it back to the Bible. But--with respect--when I look at that Quranic passage, it looks to me like the author read the Bible or heard the Bible read or talked about and didn't understand it fully.

Can you find any other human being in the Quran or ahadith who is referred to as a 'spirit'? Can you find Mohammed referred to as a spirit? Any other prophet?

Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 12-14:

"I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you unto all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me".

And in the Quran:


But those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, and believe in the (Revelation) sent down to Muhammad (PBUH) - for it is the Truth from their Lord,- He will remove from them their ills and improve their condition. Al-Quran [047:002]

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

I...don't see the point of quoting the Bible to support an Islamic cause.
Just like quoting the Qura'n to support a Christian cause.

Doesn't work.

Ice...Are you like...there?

Nope. He usually vanishes when defeated.

I don't think Ice Tea really discusses these things.

My feeling is that he looks at things in a straightforward and simple way:

1. The Quran is obviously true and Islam is obviously correct.

2. Anyone who says they believe something else is just not being honest.

3. Christianity is so riddled with obvious nonsense and contradictions that no one who takes an open-minded look at it can possibly believe it.

4. It's just as simple as that. Period.

So, he takes the medicinal approach.

I don't think he's really talking to me and discussing an issue between equals, as you would discuss a difference over which car is better or whether life in Oman or life in Tunisia is better.

He's trying to wake me up with cool, clear water! Splash! Splash! Come on, Jeff! Wake up, man! You'll be sorry in the end if you don't! Splash! Wake up! You won't regret it if you do the right thing!

It doesn't matter so much if this or that argument is perfect. It's a question of waking people from hypocrisy so they don't perish.

Ah! Well! :) What can you do? That's what he thinks as far as I can tell and he's not the only Muslim to think that way... He's an honest man and good according to his lights, I believe.

But thank goodness for people with more generous minds like you, Threadlike. I think you are just as likely--probably more likely--to be successful in your dua as Tea is.

I wonder what Tea would say if someone converted to Islam but told him they honestly didn't believe it before they converted and weren't a hypocrite at all! :p

Thread, if it is stated in the Bible that Moses pbuh was a prophet sent to Jews and has been given the Torah, would you reject it?

If the Bible tells you that Jesus had miracles, such as rasing people from death, etc by Allah will, will you reject it?

If the Bible tells you that Jesus had miracles, such as rasing people from death, etc by his own will you accept it?

Now after answering that, draw your own conclusion.

If the Bible told me that Jesus was God, that he was crucifixed AND it told me that Moses was a prophet then yes, to me as a Muslim, the Bible becomes simply an unreliable source of religious information.

My 100% reliable source is the Holy Qura'n. And I'd use that.
To Christians, they reverse that. The Qura'n tells them that God is ONE which they believe but it ALSO tells them Jesus PBUH was a mere prophet which they do not. Therefore the Qura'n cannot be a reliable source to support Christian theologian causes.

Christains don't believe in the Quran and don't believe in prophet Mohammed pbuh.

While Muslims believe in prophet Jesus pbuh and believe in the Injeel, that doesn't mean today Injeel is the same as the one revealed to prophet Issa pbuh.

And instead of AND you can use OR, thus in that case everything that doesn't contradicts with the Quran is acceptable.

Ice...The idea is quite simple, as is my question.
You have a Maths book that says 1+1 = 2.
And at the same time the same book says 1-1= 1.
That book is not a good place to see Mathematics from, yes or no?
IMHO, it is not a good source at all, in fact as would tell you any Mathematician.

In the same analogy you have a Bible that you (and I) BELIEVE was ONCE a good source but had been already TOUCHED by foreign hands. It is no longer truthful in the whole and is NOT a good source to document religious incidents for the Muslims...What contradicts with the Qura'n or what does not contradict is irrelevant since we're simply looking for the BASIC facts said right first before we go into anything else. And, as you and I know, the basic facts of Jesus being God and Jesus being crucified are not part of Islamic theology and so are not approved as being Islamic in nature or in any agreement with the Qura'n. The Christians don't need proof that their material is in agreement with the Qura'n, and neither do the Muslim need proof that their material is in agreement with the Bible.

The Bible is the book of CHRISTIANS. You refer to it if you want to learn about CHRISTIANITY and JESUS and Christian theology.
The Holy Qura'n is the book to those who follow ISLAM and to those who THINK OF FOLLOWING IT.You refer to it if you want to learn about Islam.

What's so hard to grasp?

Quran is a book for all humanity not just muslims and arabs, same goes to prophet Mohammed pbuh, a universal messanger.

We all know that.
Next.

Nothing next.

Back to the topic.

Using quotes from the Bible, to support the Quran, since the Bible according to the Quran is corrupt, doesn't hold any water.

Same goes for quoting the Quran in a debate on to disprove Christian theology. Because frankly, I dismiss it straight off the bat. Unless of course you want me to repeat that the Quran is wrong....over and over again.

The Quran doesn't need any support.

Repeating the Quran is wrong over and over doesn't hold any water, the Quran challenges humans to find a single contradiction in it, or produce one sura or chapter like it.

The Quran doesn't need any support.

Repeating the Quran is wrong over and over doesn't hold any water, the Quran challenges humans to find a single contradiction in it, or produce one sura or chapter like it.

But the problem is: who judges the result of the challenge?

Muslims?

Christians?

Or neutral people?

Repeating the Quran is right over and over doesn't hold much water either for most people.

They need demonstration and persuasion.

That's where the support has to come in.

Atheists and agnostics, of course.

But the problem is: who judges the result of the challenge?

Muslims?

Christians?

Or neutral people?


My thoughts are:

Since the language of the holy Quran is in arabic then with regard to producing sura like it for example it should be people who are experts in the arabic language.

As for finding contradictions in the Quran it will be also experts in arabic language, the person should also know the science of the Quran, reasons of revelations. Scientists (who should also be Knowledgeable in arabic) to find out if the scientific miracles stated in the Quran in conflict with today science or not.

Arabic langauge is the critical factor.


Repeating the Quran is right over and over doesn't hold much water either for most people.

They need demonstration and persuasion.

That's where the support has to come in.

Again the Quran gave you challenges to disprove it, take the challenge if you wish. :)

Do they not then consider the Qur'ân carefully? Had it been from other than Allâh, they would surely have found therein many a contradiction.

And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'ân) to Our slave (Muhammad (peace be upon him) then produce a Sûrah (Chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allâh, if you are truthful.

My thoughts are:

Since the language of the holy Quran is in arabic then with regard to producing sura like it for example it should be people who are experts in the arabic language.

As for finding contradictions in the Quran it will be also experts in arabic language, the person should also know the science of the Quran, reasons of revelations. Scientists (who should also be Knowledgeable in arabic) to find out if the scientific miracles stated in the Quran in conflict with today science or not.

Arabic langauge is the critical factor.



Again the Quran gave you challenges to disprove it, take the challenge if you wish. :)

Do they not then consider the Qur'ân carefully? Had it been from other than Allâh, they would surely have found therein many a contradiction.

And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'ân) to Our slave (Muhammad (peace be upon him) then produce a Sûrah (Chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allâh, if you are truthful.


1. Since Classical Arabic is a different language from the one you speak, I assume neither of us are experts. So neither of us can judge this.

2. Obviously, I don't speak Classical Arabic at all. If you can't explain the theory of perfection to non-Arabic speakers, why should we believe you?

3. If you say that the Quran cannot be judged except by Classical Arabic scholars, then most Muslims can't judge it either, since most Muslims don't speak Arabic at all.

4. There are Westerners who know much more about Classical Arabic than you do who are uncomplimentary about the Quran and its text. For example, the Classical Arabic scholar chosen by the Yemenis to edit their newly discovered Quran texts, Dr. Gerald Puin. (I won't put his quotations here; you can google "Gerald Puin Quran" if you like...)

I can only judge given what I know and what people can show me. And although I read the Quran and respect it, I remain unconvinced about the Muslim claims.

But we are getting far afield aren't we? You can have the last word on this subject if you like, Tea. Then back to the main point, if you have more to say about it.

Anyway, it always helps to look up the whole passage and read it. Here is the part of the quotation about the Paraclete that your writer gives:

John 14:16 “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.”

Here is the whole passage:

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always,
the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you.

I rather think all this fits much better with "spirit" as we all normally understand it, and with other uses of the word "spirit" in the Bible--the Holy Spirit that Jesus communicates with breathing as I showed you--than with some prophet yet to come.

Mohammed is not "with us always" in any normal sense of the word. The world could "see" Mohammed. Mohammed did not "remain with [us]", but rather left us like any man. And Mohammed is not "in us".

So, I don't think this passage refers to him.

And if they author thought it did, he shouldn't have pretended that these words didn't exist. He should have quoted them and discussed them.

Your standards for judging the Quran are very high, in terms of scholarship and linguistic ability. This man seems to show neither quality. And not even the simple honesty of dealing straightforwardly with a quoted passage.

There are many muslims who speak classical arabic (fu97a), on the other hand I agree with you that at the time the Quran was revealed arabs used to speak classical arabic by nature, but non of them was able to take the challeneg because they knew they can't do it. But the challenege is still open to anyone till the final day. :)

About the another Advocate, it can't be the Holy Spirit, first because the quote says He and not It, second thing the Holy Spirit already exists at Jesus time, in fact Angel Jibril is refered as the Holy Spirit in the Quran.

Prophet Mohammed pbuh always with us because of the holy Quran which we have till today and because of the prophet sunnah.

There are many muslims who speak classical arabic (fu97a), on the other hand I agree with you that at the time the Quran was revealed arabs used to speak classical arabic by nature, but non of them was able to take the challeneg because they knew they can't do it. But the challenege is still open to anyone till the final day. :)

About the another Advocate, it can't be the Holy Spirit, first because the quote says He and not It, second thing the Holy Spirit already exists at Jesus time, in fact Angel Jibril is refered as the Holy Spirit in the Quran.

Prophet Mohammed pbuh always with us because of the holy Quran which we have till today and because of the prophet sunnah.

You know, I'm afraid this gender argument doesn't make sense.

In German, the word for "young girl" is "Mädchen".

That word is neuter, not feminine. So in German, this is how you talk: "There is a young girl. It is beautiful."

But you can also call a young girl "she".

This is what comes from people who are not language scholars writing these kinds of articles. Just as you think only a scholar should judge classical Arabic, I think you can see from this example that only a scholar of Greek or a linguist can judge this issue. The author doesn't even know as much about it as I do! :p

I suppose you could say that Mohammed is with us, just as any influential figure is with us. But he is certainly no more with us than Jesus is. So I don't see the point of the comment.

And he is certainly not "in us".

If you insist on having a text mean what you want it to mean, you can wrench it around and get it to mean what you say.

But all the factors I have mentioned make it sit far more easily with an incorporeal Spirit, whom Jesus communicates by breathing as you saw in the other passage, than any future prophet.

As far as what the Quran calls the Holy Spirit, as I said, that just looks to me like copying without understanding. But I'm sure Muslims see it a different way.

Thanks, as always, for your politeness! :)

I suppose you could say that Mohammed is with us, just as any influential figure is with us. But he is certainly no more with us than Jesus is. So I don't see the point of the comment.

And he is certainly not "in us".

So you are saying that the Comforter is Jesus?

And what does 'in us' means?

Do you call the Holy Spirit, He or She or It?


If you insist on having a text mean what you want it to mean, you can wrench it around and get it to mean what you say.


Obviously you are the one doing that. :)

You explain things to suit your beliefs not to explain the real meaning of the quotes.

The Quran doesn't need any support.

Repeating the Quran is wrong over and over doesn't hold any water, the Quran challenges humans to find a single contradiction in it, or produce one sura or chapter like it.

Then why do you feel the need to reassure yourself that Mohammad is a prophet of God by looking at the Christian Scripture (and Tanakh for that matter)?

I would have thought the Quran would be enough proof for you, but it obviously isn't.

We already have our interpretations of the verses, even after Mohammad came along we haven't changed that interpretation. We have been reading our books far longer than the Muslims have been reading our books.

For me the whole Quran is a contradiction.. Mohammad changed the Laws after God specifically said that the Laws must not be changed.

So you are saying that the Comforter is Jesus?

And what does 'in us' means?

Do you call the Holy Spirit, He or She or It?



Obviously you are the one doing that. :)

You explain things to suit your beliefs not to explain the real meaning of the quotes.

As in Mohammed being 'in us'?

As in the supposed impossibility of a language calling something of "it" that is usually called "he" or "she"?

As in forgetting that the normal meaning of "Spirit" is something incorporeal and that Jesus communicates this Spirit by breathing?

***

Ice Tea, if I am arguing about Islam, I take the trouble to find out what I am arguing against.

So YOU answer the questions:

1. Is the Comforter supposed to be Jesus in this passage according to Christians?

2. What do Christians mean by the Holy Spirit being "in us"?

3. Do we call the Holy Spirit He, She, or It?

If you don't know the answers, then you don't know whether your own ideas are right because you don't know what you are arguing against...

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

For me the whole Quran is a contradiction.. Mohammad changed the Laws after God specifically said that the Laws must not be changed.

You can't prove the Quran is a contradiction, saying words is easy.

And which Laws Mohammed changed?

Ice Tea, if I am arguing about Islam, I take the trouble to find out what I am arguing against.



That is what the thread is about, check first post.

That is what the thread is about, check first post.

Well, then what do you think the answers are? Do you know? Why are you asking me?

My questions were based on your answers, so feel free not to answer. :)

Maybe wudjab will do that.

Tea,

Please disengage the 'Pretend not to see the posts difficult to answer filter'.

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

If you go back you will find the answer some where, just make sure to wear your glassess.

My questions were based on your answers, so feel free not to answer. :)

Maybe wudjab will do that.

Sigh!....

I think you ought to do your homework better than that if you are going to discuss the passage..

But

1. Is the Comforter supposed to be Jesus in this passage according to Christians?

Jesus says that He will ask for ANOTHER Comforter: the Spirit.

2. What do Christians mean by the Holy Spirit being "in us"?

Well, God can be "closer to us that our jugular vein" as the Muslims say, because He is by nature incorporeal. Bodies occupy space. Spirits are not bodies and so they don't occupy space. They can be "within" us in a literal sense because a spirit is where it acts.

3. Do we call the Holy Spirit He, She, or It?

We don't call the Holy Spirit "She." We sometimes call the Holy Spirit "It". Most often we call the Holy Spirit, "He".

But as Jesus says, God is a Spirit.

God is Spirit, and those who worship him must worship in Spirit and truth.
John 4: 24.
And we always call God, "He".

I'm a bit confused how you can, on one hand, claim that the Bible is corrupted and no longer exists in its original form...

and

on the other hand use the very same 'corrupted' Bible to make the claim that Mohammed was mentioned in the Bible.

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

Thanks for the answers.

Now, how can the comforter be Spirit if Spirit already exists, there is a contradiction. And how Spirit by itself guide you, how Spirit communicates to people to tell them what is right and what is wrong, on the other hand a prophet is a human being so it's logical that a human being guide other people.

If you already have Spirit in your body why you need another Spirit to be 'in you'?

Calling God 'He' doesn't mean God has gender, God is different from his creations.

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

wudjab, if you read the first post you will come to know the actual meaning of the quote.

The meaning of the quote is irrelevant.

If you claim the Bible is corrupted, how can you use a quote from this same corrupted Bible ?

wudjab, which part of the initial post you don't agree with?

All what is stated in it makes sense and logical.

Thanks for the answers.

Now, how can the comforter be Spirit if Spirit already exists, there is a contradiction. And how Spirit by itself guide you, how Spirit communicates to people to tell them what is right and what is wrong, on the other hand a prophet is a human being so it's logical that a human being guide other people.

If you already have Spirit in your body why you need another Spirit to be 'in you'?

Calling God 'He' doesn't mean God has gender, God is different from his creations.

These are all interesting points.

The first one, though, is correct, but it involves a mistake.

"Gender" is not the same as "sex".

"Sex" is a physical thing. God has no sex, He is not of the Male or of the Female sex.

"Gender" is a grammatical thing. "Gender" applies to words.

English usually doesn't have grammatical gender for words. Most languages do. I read that Arabic does.

So, for example, in German, the sun is a "she", the moon is a "he" and a young girl is an "it" (as I said).

God is not a man or a woman. But God calls Himself "He" and we believe there is a reason for that. But that is neither a question of sex nor gender.

Jesus doesn't say that the Comforter doesn't exist already. He says that the Comforter will come to us. The Spirit guides the Church from within so that Her understanding of the Truth will be sustained and deepened.

Why do we need God to dwell within us? Well, because He loves us and wants us to be united with Him. And if we have any sense, we want to be united with Him also.

A spirit, including the Holy Spirit, can guide individuals in a number of ways. Sometimes we can hear the voice of a spirit in what seems like audible words in the mind. Sometimes, more often, a spirit can guide us by prompting thoughts and desires within us.

How do you think God communicates with angels?

By the way, Ice Tea, who sent Mohammed?

Allah or someone else?

So, for example, in German, the sun is a "she", the moon is a "he" and a young girl is an "it" (as I said).

Was the first Bible writen in German?


Jesus doesn't say that the Comforter doesn't exist already. He says that the Comforter will come to us. The Spirit guides the Church from within so that Her understanding of the Truth will be sustained and deepened.

How can the Spirit guide the Church? And if there is no church then what the Spirit will guide?



A spirit, including the Holy Spirit, can guide individuals in a number of ways. Sometimes we can hear the voice of a spirit in what seems like audible words in the mind. Sometimes, more often, a spirit can guide us by prompting thoughts and desires within us.

So you are saying you are having two spirits in your body, one is spirit and the other the Holy Spirit?

In that case why do you need to confess to a priest?


How do you think God communicates with angels?

I don't see how is that related to the discussion. But humans and angels are two different creations.

By the way, Ice Tea, who sent Mohammed?

Allah or someone else?

All prophets sent by Allah.

How is that related to the topic Jeff?

John 14:16 “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever.” (American Standard Version)

When we continue reading beyond chapter 14:16 and chapter 16:7, we find that Jesus predicts the specific details of the arrival and identity of the parakletos. Therefore, according to the context of John 14 & 16 we discover the following facts.

1. Jesus said the parakletos is a human being:
John 16:13 “He will speak.”

John 16:7 “…for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you.”

It is impossible that the Comforter be the “Holy Ghost” because the Holy Ghost was present long before Jesus and during his ministry.[5]

John 16:13 Jesus referred to the paraclete as ‘he’ and not ‘it’ seven times, no other verse in the Bible contains seven masculine pronouns. Therefore, paraclete is a person, not a ghost.

2. Jesus is called a parakletos:
“And if any man sin, we have an advocate (parakletos) with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” (1 John 2:1)

Here we see that parakletos is a physical and human intercessor.

3. The Divinity of Jesus a later innovation
Jesus was not accepted as divine until the Council of Nicea, 325 CE, but everyone, except Jews, agree he was a prophet of God, as indicated by the Bible:

Matthew 21:11 “...This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee.”

Luke 24:19 “...Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people.”

4. Jesus prayed to God for another parakletos:
John 14:16 “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another parakletos.”

All quotes from a supposedly corrupt Bible which you are using to prove your absurd assertion that it is referring to Mohammed.

Why do you use a corrupted source ?

QUOTE=IceTea;1061265

Was the first Bible writen in German?

No. But your writer thinks that just because the word "spirit" is an "it" by gender in Greek, therefore it doesn't make sense to call the Spirit "he".

I am just pointing out that it does makes sense to do that. And I am giving the German example, where a young girl is by grammar "it", but we also call them "she".

How can the Spirit guide the Church? And if there is no church then what the Spirit will guide?

The first question I don't understand. Through guidance and protection over time. It doesn't seem difficult to me for God to guide human beings over time, is it too difficult for Him? By internal promptings, by putting you in circumstances where you realize things from context, all the sorts of things that happen in life.

I don't really understand what you mean by the second question! :p

So you are saying you are having two spirits in your body, one is spirit and the other the Holy Spirit?

My own spirit is proper to me and is the essential part of my self.

God's Spirit is anywhere He wants it to be and is associated with mine through love.

In that case why do you need to confess to a priest?

Because God wants me to! He works through the Church, just like He works through other people in our lives all the time. When we sin, we sin against our fellow man, not just against God. So it is fitting that we should seek pardon through our fellow man too. Oh, gee, there are so many reasons. And Jesus said to His Apostles: "Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven." He said that right after He breathed on them and gave them the Holy Spirit.



I don't see how is that related to the discussion. But humans and angels are two different creations.

Yes, but my point is simply that God can communicate to other creatures, it's not illogical. But we can't say HOW he does it, because we can't study Him with microscopes like we can study atoms.

All prophets sent by Allah.

How is that related to the topic Jeff?

Well, do you think they are sent by Allah only?

Let's go step-by-step and see where we end up. :)

All quotes from a supposedly corrupt Bible which you are using to prove your absurd assertion that it is referring to Mohammed.

Why do you use a corrupted source ?

If I had a nickel for every time I asked that question and got no convincing answer...

We'd both be very rich, eh ?

:D

If I had a nickel for every time I asked that question and got no convincing answer...

:p

You'd be able to buy the Brooklyn Bridge!

Tea has left the building.

Woah, wudjab, Bill-Gates kinda thing...And I COULD buy that bridge Jeff :D

You can't prove the Quran is a contradiction, saying words is easy.

And which Laws Mohammed changed?

It contradicts the Torah.

These are the Laws in a nutshell, all found in the Torah

http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

As an example....Do you recite the Shema, do you celebrate Passover, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, Do you put mezuzahs on your gates and door posts?

Can I answer as Tea ?

Kara those were all corrupted Scriptures which needed to be corrected.

It contradicts the Torah.

These are the Laws in a nutshell, all found in the Torah

http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

As an example....Do you recite the Shema, do you celebrate Passover, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, Sukkot, Do you put mezuzahs on your gates and door posts?

There are many sceintific errors and contradictions in the Torah, you can start with the order of creation of the universe.

Jeff, didn't Jesus said in "I have many things to say to you but you can not bear them now ....

Now if you believe that these many things will be given by the Holy Spirit, can you list these many things which Jesus was talking about? What new things the Holy Spirit gave you that Jesus didn't give you?

True, when people sin they sin against fellow man also, so you can just go to the person invloved and apologize from him, why do you go to a different man (a priest)? In addition to that, if Christians believe that Jesus died for his sins he doesn't need to do all these things.

There are many sceintific errors and contradictions in the Torah, you can start with the order of creation of the universe.

The above does not prove that Mohammad didn't change the Laws.

Do you recite the Shema? Do you celebrate Passover (its next weekend you know)?

The Torah is a book full of Laws and teachings, not science. Is that really the best you can come up with?

In Islam the source of the Laws are the holy Quran and the prophet pbuh sunnah.

The truth is that Jews themselves changed the Torah and added manthing to it, saying for example that prophet Lut pbuh had committed adultry with his duaghters is a false claim.

If the order of the creation for example stated in the Torah contradicts with today science then you still believe it's the true word of God?

Even the Quran is not a book of science but a book of signs, on the other hand you can't prove any scientific miracle stated in the Quran contradicts with today established science, do you see the difference.

In Islam the source of the Laws are the holy Quran and the prophet pbuh sunnah.

The truth is that Jews themselves changed the Torah and added manthing to it, saying for example that prophet Lut pbuh had committed adultry with his duaghters is a false claim.

In Judaism the source of the Laws are the Torah and Orals laws.

What proof do you have other than the Quran that they have been changed?

If the order of the creation for example stated in the Torah contradicts with today science then you still believe it's the true word of God?

Even the Quran is not a book of science but a book of signs, on the other hand you can't prove any scientific miracle stated in the Quran contradicts with today established science, do you see the difference.

Actually creation doesn't conflict nor is it exact. There are scientists out there who refuse to acknowledge the big bang because its too "creationistic".

And yes I'd still believe if it did conflict, I don't need scientific proof, science it always changing, new theories written etc. And I'd still also believe that the Quran isn't from God.

The Quran is challenging you to prove that isn't from God.

If the Bible says that the earth is falt, then you believe God said that?

. And I'd still also believe that the Quran isn't from God.

Of course it's not from Jesus. If that what you mean by God

El Rey, I think she is on the Jews side not Christians side.

Aha. This is interesting since now we got a Jew point of view with us.

In Judaism the source of the Laws are the Torah and Orals laws.


Is there only one identical version of Torah for all Jews kara ? Or there are others and what's the difference between Torah laws and the Old Testament with Christians ?

The Quran is challenging you to prove that isn't from God.

If the Bible says that the earth is falt, then you believe God said that?

I say it isn't from God because the Laws were changed.

No I wouldn't because I know the earth is spherical. I also think that woman wasn't made from a rib of a man.

You mean man made Laws are changed.

In addition to that some previous prophets Laws were specific for that time as they were Prophets for specific group of people and time.

When did you came to know about the earth is sperical and what does the Bible says about the shape of the earth?

Aha. This is interesting since now we got a Jew point of view with us.



Is there only one identical version of Torah for all Jews kara ? Or there are others and what's the difference between Torah laws and the Old Testament with Christians ?

There is only one acceptable Hebrew version. They follow a very strict code/formula when scribing the Torah. One mistake and the parchment has to be thrown out (actually its would probably be buried with respect).

The Torah is the first 5 books of what Christians call the Old Testament. That is were the Laws are found. The other books are there but in a different order to what the Jews have.

I find that most English translations are shocking because they rely on the septuagint which was the Greek translation of the Hebrew.

There is only one acceptable Hebrew version. .

This means that there are other unacceptable hebrw versions right ? And when there are more than one version, it's hard to find out which one is the true. What's the reliable one for you and most jews? I may be interested in having a look at it.


The Torah is the first 5 books of what Christians call the Old Testament. That is were the Laws are found. The other books are there but in a different order to what the Jews have.


So what's in the OT is the same as what's in the Turah.

Now Kara, if only you ancestors had collected all the 'differing' versions, collated them into a master version and burned all the originals you wouldn't be having this discussion and you could proudly claim that there is only one version of the Torah.

You mean man made Laws are changed.

In addition to that some previous prophets Laws were specific for that time as they were Prophets for specific group of people and time.

When did you came to know about the earth is sperical and what does the Bible says about the shape of the earth?


You know what I mean.

Moses was the only prophet who gave us the Laws. The other prophets were there to make sure they were kept.

I don't see how the shape of the earth is pertinent to this discussion unless you are proselytising.

This means that there are other unacceptable hebrw versions right ? And when there are more than one version, it's hard to find out which one is the true. What's the reliable one for you and most jews? I may be interested in having a look at it.

So what's in the OT is the same as what's in the Turah.

The unacceptable versions are buried, they are the one with mistakes while scribing. What this means is you can pick up a Torah Scroll, or Book and they will all be exactly the same and it doesn't matter where or when it was written.

Yes it should be the same.

What do you think of the Samaritan Torah ?

What do you think of the Samaritan Torah ?

I would imagine that Pharisaical Jews look at the question in a way similar to that of Catholic and Orthodox Christians:

God guides and protects His People.

He doesn't just drop a Book from the Sky and say: This is Perfect.

The differences between the versions are all relatively minor.

What is important for us to know, we know.

The Living God guides our understanding of the text and the text without that understanding, even if it were "perfect" or invariant would be useless.

But in any case, there is a Consensus Text which is what we use and is "perfect" enough for us.

As far as variants are concerned, for us Catholics I would say:

It's like a perfect picture with a small smudge on it that human hands have made.

Just because a picture doesn't have a smudge, doesn't mean it's perfect.

The Book of Mormon is perfect...no variations.

But we both agree it's not the words of God.

I agree jeff but what kara's said is:

you can pick up a Torah Scroll, or Book and they will all be exactly the same and it doesn't matter where or when it was written.


She was wrong.

I agree jeff but what kara's said is:



She was wrong.

The Samaritans are Samaritans, not Jews. It's a different religion. They don't believe in David or in Solomon, they didn't worship at the Temple, etc., etc.

What Kara was saying was that the JEWS use only one text with no variations. It's called the Masoretic Text.

You know what I mean.

Moses was the only prophet who gave us the Laws. The other prophets were there to make sure they were kept.

I don't see how the shape of the earth is pertinent to this discussion unless you are proselytising.

Jesus made some of what has been forbidden to children of Israel lawful, but this all by God permission. Think about it this way, God kept on sending prophets for many years and Laws were given to them, the Laws were different for each nation and subject to modfications, the Laws came to it's final shape at the time of the final messanger prophet Mohammed pbuh supported by the final scripture the holy Quran.

Are you saying that the Bible doesn't say anything about the shape of the earth, it is important because if the Bible says the earth is flat then you believe it's true since you consider the Torah (which is available today) the true word of God?

Jesus made some of what has been forbidden to children of Israel lawful, but this all by God permission. Think about it this way, God kept on sending prophets for many years and Laws were given to them, the Laws were different for each nation and subject to modfications, the Laws came to it's final shape at the time of the final messanger prophet Mohammed pbuh supported by the final scripture the holy Quran.

Are you saying that the Bible doesn't say anything about the shape of the earth, it is important because if the Bible says the earth is flat then you believe it's true since you consider the Torah (which is available today) the true word of God?

You really don't get it do you? No prophet after Moses up to Malachi changed the Laws. If they changed the Laws they are considered false prophets.

BTW Malachi is the last Prophet recognised by Jews.

The Tanakh doesn't talk about the shape of the earth. And never have I read it and said "hey its saying the earth is flat". I suppose you are now going to show me "proof"? Sooooo transparent.

What do you think of the Samaritan Torah ?

Don't use it.

The Samaritans are Samaritans, not Jews. It's a different religion. They don't believe in David or in Solomon, they didn't worship at the Temple, etc., etc.

What Kara was saying was that the JEWS use only one text with no variations. It's called the Masoretic Text.

So they use diffferent version of Torah right ?

Religiously, they are the adherents to Samaritanism, a religion based on the Torah.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritan

Don't use it.

Why ? You said all other wrong versions are burried ? why not this one too ?

You really don't get it do you? No prophet after Moses up to Malachi changed the Laws. If they changed the Laws they are considered false prophets.
BTW Malachi is the last Prophet recognised by Jews.

The Tanakh doesn't talk about the shape of the earth. And never have I read it and said "hey its saying the earth is flat". I suppose you are now going to show me "proof"? Sooooo transparent.

Prophets didn't change God's laws. Humans did. E.g: Jews.

You really don't get it do you? No prophet after Moses up to Malachi changed the Laws. If they changed the Laws they are considered false prophets.

BTW Malachi is the last Prophet recognised by Jews.

The Tanakh doesn't talk about the shape of the earth. And never have I read it and said "hey its saying the earth is flat". I suppose you are now going to show me "proof"? Sooooo transparent.

God has the authority to chnage Laws through prophets, it's not up to Jews to agree or not.

What do you understand from below quotes?

Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)


What are these four corners of the earth?

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

God has the authority to chnage Laws through prophets, it's not up to Jews to agree or not.

What do you understand from below quotes?



What are these four corners of the earth?

Ice Tea, Revelation is from the New Testament! :p

If you read something other than Muslim websites, you will learn something about your subject matter...

How about the other 4 quotes, are they from the NT?

And what does the 4 corners means anyway, where can we see them on earth today?

We still use the expression today! :p

Jeff, the question is does the earth has four corners?

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

"and Jesus ..........for forty days in the wilderness was tempted by the devil" (Luke 4:1).

In the Bible we also read:

"God cannot be tempted by the devil" (James 1:13)

If God cannot be tempted by the devil, and Jesus was tempted by the devil, then Jesus cannot be God.

What do you have to say wudjab?

No, you first.

Tea,

That Biblical verse you quoted above.

Would that be from the same corrupted Bible you seem to decry in every other post ?

Why ? You said all other wrong versions are burried ? why not this one too ?

The Samaritans don't use the same method of transcribing as far as I am aware. The Jews only use one version with one method of transcribing, thus all the Torah scrolls and books the jews use are exactly the same.

Prophets didn't change God's laws. Humans did. E.g: Jews.

You have no proof of that, unless you are including Mohammad then I am in agreement.

God has the authority to chnage Laws through prophets, it's not up to Jews to agree or not.


So God is fickle?

Tea, please answer the question.

"and Jesus ..........for forty days in the wilderness was tempted by the devil" (Luke 4:1).

In the Bible we also read:

"God cannot be tempted by the devil" (James 1:13)

If God cannot be tempted by the devil, and Jesus was tempted by the devil, then Jesus cannot be God.

What do you have to say wudjab?

Well, the answer is not hard and it's just like the kind of answer that Muslims use to reconcile the suras about the Angelic Visitation to Mary as I outlined in another post that I didn't see you respond to.

If I say "I was tempted" it can mean two different things.

It can mean "someone tried to tempt me".

Or, it can mean "I felt the desire to do evil".

If you try to get me to become a Muslim, then I am being tempted by you in the first sense of the word.

But I feel no desire to do it! So the second sense does not apply.

On the other hand, if I am fasting and I pass by some really good smelling food, I can say I was tempted to eat it.

That's the first sense of the word! Not even any person involved. Just my subjective desire.

And that's the sense in which James means God cannot be tempted: He cannot feel the desire to do wrong. You can see that from the next verse, because James explains that NO ONE is really tempted from the outside: the source of temptation for each person is themselves:

14
Rather, each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.
15
Then desire conceives and brings forth sin, and when sin reaches maturity it gives birth to death.

James 1: 14-15.

So the passages are talking about two different things.

And of course, people can TRY to tempt God...but they fail.

Just as Deuteronomy says:
Ye shall not tempt the LORD your God, as ye tempted him in Massah

Deuteronomy 6

That's the same way God the Son was tempted in the flesh when He dwelt among us in His Blessed Body on this earth.

Isaiah 40:22 It is He that sitteth above the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in;