Who is Jesus Christ to you?

quote:

---

TheOne's a Jew

---

But aren't all the Christians here too? Jesus was a Jew so aren't they just a Jewish sect?

Hi TheOne. I think what Andya was referring to was Sura 2, which discusses the relationship between Islam and Judaism/Christianity. There are a number of references, but one of the ones most germane (Andya can correct me if I'm wrong) is Sura 2:121 - Those people to whom We gave AL-Tawrah and AL-Injil, who read their Book with careful scrutiny in search of truth, shall recognize what really proceeded from Allah and what has been adulterated by base admixture of false glosses. Such persons shall comprehend the truth and accordingly honour the Quran. And he who refuses to acknowledge the truth proceeded from Allah shall be an inherent loser. (Translation from the Egyptian Ministry of Al Awqaf, Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs on-line Quran).As you can plainly see, the verse is talking about the Torah and Bible having been previously given to the Jews and Christians respectively, but then corrupted. The Quran in this case is clearly shown to be without the "adulteration" and "false glosses" put by fallible men into the previous two works. IOW, Allah had been there and done that with the other religions, and they botched the message. Third time's a charm, I guess, even for a deity.

Corintians contains a verse that speaks FIRST of naturality THEN spritual up rising DEPENDENT on the Ressurection and I am tending to think that S J Gould has over depended on repentence that he missed in this flesh the difference of death by species, death by cells, death by individuals and the SPIRTUAL change expreience by a reading and understanding of these books of Paul.Topobiology leaves a crucial mechancial role for for cell death and to the extent that this is NOT programmed, the reference of Paul to organismal flesh difference DOES refer to the natural BEOFORE God and the Spirit but that the Grace could be so confused is also NOT possible on such a reading and yet Gould continued to see Days in Genesis relative to his understanding of hoxology and yet the relgious nature of Cantors set theory has NOT been authorize as of yet he did speak in latin of "creatures"?I have not said how I link the infinite POint beyond the complex plane to the HEAD which is also a part of the FLESH in Cornitians and a result of hoxological logos grammetology but sex bias contra Fisher is not out of thequestion of Cantors extension and USE of ACtual infinity that who knows maybe the Catholic Church HAD and is still using his call to the church to make sure it finitiely gets the proper use of infinity correct???

Am not Andya but I believe I can answer some of these, being that I am somewhat familiar with the subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------Heres a quick question, you said that you see Jesus as a messanger to "the children of Israel (exclusively)" is that Israel as in Jacob (of Jacob and Esau fame) who "wrestled with God and men"?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well the twins Jacob (Yaakov) and Esau were fighting in the womb, and after birth, but you are thinking of Isaac (Yitzhak) Jacob's father which was the one to be called Israel. He was called that after he dreamed he had wrestled with an angel of G-d and defeated him in the dream. The name also alludes ot the constant struggle of man's and G-d's will.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was under the impression that the Arabic tribes claimed descent from Abraham through Ishmael,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They do and they are. However since Ishmael had his own covenant and the Jews beleieve in relationship by covenant not blood, all muslims are thusly considered to be Ishmaelites even the ones of non-Arabic descent. I believe the Muslims identify with ishamel in that way as well. By the way the Muslims do consider Ishmael a prophet, and have tweaked the Bible to have Abraham sacrifice (well almost) Ishmael rather then Isaac. Of course the muslims claim it was either the Jews, Christians or Both that have changed their Bibles. That happens to be one of those "minor differences" between the 3 faiths.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
does this imply that they also claim to be descendants of Jacob, or is Mohammed seen as opening faith to everyone in a way that Jesus (or "Isa" right?) did not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I know Mohammed was an Ishmaelite, and his Islam was preached first to the Arabs but eventually was meant for the whole world, "not that the whole world would be extatic to accept the new religion".

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TheOne's a Jew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------But aren't all the Christians here too? Jesus was a Jew so aren't they just a Jewish sect?--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey Karl Marx was also born a Jew does it mean that communism is a Jewish sect? Jesus ain't Judaism plain and simple.------------------
"It's human to err, but only a fool insist on making the same mistake twice" -- Shelomo Ha Melech

I wouldn't call Christianity a Jewish sect, despite Christianity's desperate attempts to presume the connection. Christianity is a radical departure from just about everything Jewish.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Um I'm pretty sure it was Jacob....

quote:

---

Genesis 32:22 And he arose that night and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven sons, and crossed over the ford of Jabbok. 23He took them, sent them over the brook, and sent over what he had. 24Then Jacob was left alone; and a Man wrestled with him until the breaking of day. 25Now when He saw that He did not prevail against him, He touched the socket of his hip; and the socket of Jacob's hip was out of joint as He wrestled with him. 26And He said, "Let Me go, for the day breaks."
But he said, "I will not let You go unless You bless me!"
27So He said to him, "What is your name?"
He said, "Jacob."
28And He said, "Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel;[2] for you have struggled with God and with men, and have prevailed."
29Then Jacob asked, saying, "Tell me Your name, I pray."
And He said, "Why is it that you ask about My name?" And He blessed him there.
30So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel:[3] "For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." 31Just as he crossed over Penuel[4] the sun rose on him, and he limped on his hip. 32Therefore to this day the children of Israel do not eat the muscle that shrank, which is on the hip socket, because He touched the socket of Jacob's hip in the muscle that shrank.

---

If one asked would Jesus have ever said he was anything but a Jew?

When I said that I believe that Jesus is a Messenger of Allah for the children of Israel (Bani Isra'il) my source is these Qur'anic verses:4:171 "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) a Messenger of Allah,
5:72 "They do blaspheme who say: 'Allah is Christ the son of Mary.' But said Christ: 'O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.' Whoever joins other gods with Allah- Allah will forbid hi the Garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrongdoers be no one to help.I remembered that Sheikh Ahmed Deedat once pointed out a Biblical verse quoting Jesus saying that he only came for the children of Israel. Lets see if I can recollect that.

One thing for sure, he wouldn't have given you a straight answer!Maybe he would have said "You will need to ask my dad"

If Wofram can negate any positive thing Gould says about contraints then is it not both adaptive and biological to think that Gould is wrong to consider death an "epiphenomena" and would not Jesus' parabalization be NEEDED to flesh out not only the periodic cycle possiblity Gould raises with respect to the duration of species VS individual # of competitions aka Wright/Fisher but also the if any genetic homology exists for the head as well as the limb articulations?? It may indeed be that cellular automata indicate that Dobhshaky's notion of mutation genetics was mis-intuited but this does not mean that natural selection is a "smoothing" affordance as engineering is to physics. Ordinals + ordertypes are not the same as Cardinals + ordertypes.I can not see how the aptive traingle means that Wolfram nonetheless needs to be rejected insofar as he maintains an impression about Von Neuman's contribution for he simply may have overdermined the extent of irreducible universality which DOES have something to do with perhaps MY own babtism as an epiphonmenum withint the Presbyterian Chruch but this does not mean that the Catholic Church may not have theology ready and waiting on the acutal infinite without error that Cantor made in philosophy of Leibniz that Pascal may clearly be read to have avoided. Ur else the end of the atomistic use in acutal inifinty was grasped and Anaxgorian philosophy is so relevant today Gigentn, Halpzahle, e-numbers, etc. as to Morowitz's mistake with Gish.If the second number class IS Telsa's wireless transformer then even if electric fish are alternatively "conductors" and insulators"" it would not be scientific to think the invariance was all by constraint and not perhaps the adaptive oversight that Fisher was afraid he had made.All of this seems true to me

What I was trying to figure out was...1)If "children of Israel" = descendants of Jacob.Assuming that Jesus (Isa?) was also a messanger or prophet for Islam does this mean that...2)a)Muslims are descendants of Jacob? I thought you identified with Ishmael?Or2)b)That Mohammeds message was meant for everyone regardless of ancestry in a way that you believe Jesus's message was not?Just trying to get it straight in my little head....I'm guessing 2)b) for now....

Hi,Have you went into some kind of rabid cut and paste frenzy?Is this a new game, see how many words you cant type before something coherent appears?I think you have replied to about 30 people here, and decided to just throw all the answers into one reply and let us sort it out ourselves! It may well do, but I dont understand a word of it!Best Wishes Brad, I take it this reply was meant for someone else.

Oh, you may be correct, I was just tyring to follow the thread without respect to the names on this list.But as to what is "coherent" that turns out to be just the word I am fairly certain that Gould MISWROTE for i read "inherent" where he put the "co". I still need to relate the "transition of Cantor's writing from the Grundlangen to the Beitrage in terms of point sets that seem increasingly possible to create deductive biogoegraphy from to me in Cantor's use of "sets" perfect, dense in themselves and inherent and coherent and then relate this to Gould's aptive traingle to be sure but the relation of plant and animal stays the same on this reading and only a few germs can disrupt this goove I fell i am in that works at least for me.Well what acutally actually happened this time was that I was reading evolution stuff and got into Cantor again to notice that he had quoted Corithians and when I read BOTH books together I found that Gould's use of Paley seems so obviously wrong to me that a belief in Jesus is as easy as answering my Catholic high school freind who asked me if I grew up in India if I would rather be a Buddist than a Presby-people. Yes, I said. But I say NO to Gould.Gould was playing for the long term and so am I. In the end we will need to hear from the Catholic Chruch again on this issue.

Actually you are right I apologize, I should have looked into the scripture before I answered. (Even Einstein made mistakes *GRIN).
Thanks for a correction
Regards.------------------
"It's human to err, but only a fool insists on making the same mistake twice" -- Shelomo Ha Melech