Seems like bible has many gods?

Nowhere was Jesus ever called God, nor did he claim to be one ! Yet the very same bible is filled with other prophets and men's who were called God!

Moses was called a God ? 

Then the LORD said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. (Exodus 7:1)

Aaron will be your spokesman to the people. He will be your mouthpiece, and you will stand in the place of God for him, telling him what to say. (Exodus 4:16)

---------------

Isaiah was called Lord ? 

Again the LORD (Isaiah) spoke to Ahaz (Isaiah 7:10)

----------------

People thought Herod was a god ?

They shouted, "This is the voice of a god, not of a man."

(Acts 12:22)

-----------------

The Jews were called God's 

"I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.'

(Psalms 82:6)

------------------

Even Paul and barnabas were called god's 

When the crowds saw what Paul had done, they raised their voice, saying in the language of Lycaonia, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!” They called Barnabas Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes, because he was the chief speaker. The priest of Zeus, whose temple was in front of the city, brought oxen and garlands to the gates, and would have made a sacrifice, joined by the multitudes." (Acts 14:11-13).

How about the IAM statement other then Jesus, Prophets and men's have also made the same statement :

John 8:58 Jesus said IAM 

John 9:9 the blind beggar said IAM 

Exodus 3:4 Moses said IAM 

Genesis 22:11 Abraham said IAM 

Matthew 26:22 All the disciples said IAM 

So are they all gods??

Do Christians speak the truth? Let the bible speak

True or False?

Almost all Christians  claim they have the Holy Spirit with them (or Inside Them) this is when they start to prophesy and boast they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, but the Golden Question is how do they know they don't have an Evil Spirit with them? It's Crystal Clear from the Bible Yahweh has Two Spirits that Proceed to Humans, One Good the other Evil! 

----------------

Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrorized him. (1 Samuel 16:14)

("The evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied.")

The next day an evil spirit from God came forcefully on Saul. He was prophesying in his house, while David was playing the lyre, as he usually did. Saul had a spear in his hand

(1 Samuel 18:10)

What's worse Paul the founder of Christianity wasn't aware if he had the Holy Spirit yet Christians claim they have lol

Yet in my judgment she is happier if she remains as she is. And I think that I too have the Spirit of God. (1 Corinthians 7:40)

----------------

Christians are in trouble now unless they can prove to us they have the Actual Good Spirit from Yahweh  not the Evil Spirit? ASK THEM FOR PROOF AND WATCH THEM TURN TO INSULTS!! ( don't forget to ask them how does God Have Good and Evil Sprits doesn't that sounds Absurd lol )

manuscript tampering

Bart Ehrman on Luke 3:22 and Anti-Adoptionism

by jamesbradfordpate

this post, Is  about Bart Ehrman’s discussion of Luke 3:22 in his book, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament.

The context of Luke 3:22 is Jesus’ baptism by John.  The King James Version for that verse reads: “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”  Ehrman’s argument is that “in you I am well pleased” is actually an attempt to theologically correct an earlier reading: “today I have begotten you.”  Why was this attempt made, according to Ehrman?  Essentially, there were adoptionists who believed that Jesus became the Son of God and Christ at his baptism, when God anointed Jesus with the Holy Spirit.  But there were Christians who disagreed with the adoptionists, believing instead that Jesus was God’s son before his baptism.  The Christian scribes who believed that Jesus was God’s son prior to his baptism changed the text to read “in you I am well pleased” instead of “today I have begotten you,” since the latter reading implied that Jesus became God’s son when he was baptized.  The change made Luke 3:22 say that God was acknowledging Jesus as his son, not making Jesus into his son at that time.

Ehrman offers text-critical grounds for his view that “today I have begotten you” was an earlier reading than “in you I am well pleased.”  In the second-third centuries C.E., Ehrman argues, “today I have begotten you” was the predominant (maybe even the only) reading.  Ehrman mentions such names as Justin, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and others, but I’ll quote Justin Martyr.  Justin says the following in Dialogue with Trypho 88, when discussing Jesus’ baptism:

For God never said to any angel what he said to Jesus: "You are my Son. Today I have become your Father." God also said, "I will be his Father, and he will be my Son."
(Hebrews 1:5)

------------------------

Just want to add another part to barts discussion :

(Biblical resurrection tampering!)

but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. (Luke 24:3)

In Luke 24:3,Codex Bezae and most of the Old Latin texts do not have the phrase 'the Lord Jesus' in 'they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus' Clearly, the phrase 'the Lord Jesus' was added by a scribe to make sure that the Gospels recorded that the women went to the right tomb. The phrase 'the Lord Jesus' only occurs in the Gospels here and in Mark 16:19 (another addition by a scribe!) and it is hard to see why the phrase would have been dropped if it were original to Luke's Gospel. 

-----------

He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: (Luke 24:6)

In Luke 24:6,Codex Bezae and most of the Old Latin texts do not have the phrase 'He is not here, but has been raised'. Clearly, this phrase was added by a scribe to make sure that the women knew that Jesus had been raised It is hard to see why the phrase would have been dropped if it were original to Luke's Gospel. 

-----------

When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. (Luke 24:40)

Codex Bezae and many Old Latin texts do not include Luke 24:40 - 'having said this, he showed them his hands and feet'. Either some scribe added this verse, or some scribe dropped it. It is hard to see why any scribe would drop the verse. It is easy to see why a scribe would add the verse, basing it on John 20:20. He would have had to alter it as John 20:20 mentions 'hands and side' and there was no spear-thrust in Luke's Gospel, but that would only be a small change. It would all help to show that the Gospels 'recorded' a physical resurrection. 

--------------------------

There you go We have clear evidence that Christians tampered with the text of the Gospels to make them better evidence for the Resurrection. How much tampering went on that we don't have evidence of?

Bible is clear the Messiah will be saved !

If the Disciples of Jesus doubted why should you agree?.

It's sounds absurd when Christians claim the crucifixion was a fulfilment and the disciples were aware of it?? 

If that's the case why did they doubt? Surely they should of been waiting for such a fulfilment right! Why did Peter rebuke Jesus when Jesus apparently mentioned he has to suffer! Surely Peter should of accepted it right?? Unless he knew the messiah has to live and not get crucified!!!!  

Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" (Matthew 16:22)

Below is a few passages showing how the disciples doubted Jesus was crucified 

--------------------------------------------------------

When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it. (Mark 16:11)

These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.

(Mark 16:13)

Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen. (Mark 16:14)

When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.

(Matthew 28:17)

But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense. (Luke 24:11)

And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? (Luke 24:41)

---------------------

Note the Old Testament is very explicit in stating that the Messiah and righteous ones will,be saved by God. 

Messiah is saved 

Now this I know: The LORD gives victory to his anointed (MESSIAH). He answers him from his heavenly sanctuary with the victorious power of his right hand

(Psalm 20:6)

For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. Wrongdoers will be completely destroyed; the offspring of the wicked will perish.

(Psalm 37:28)

Psalm 9:10

Those who know your name trust in you, for you, LORD, have never forsaken those who seek you.

Psalm 11:7

For the LORD is righteous, he loves justice; the upright will see his face.

Psalm 12:7

You, LORD, will keep the needy safe and will protect us forever from the wicked,

Psalm 21:10

You will destroy their descendants from the earth, their posterity from mankind.

Psalm 27:9

Do not hide your face from me, do not turn your servant away in anger; you have been my helper. Do not reject me or forsake me, God my Savior.

Psalm 31:23

Love the LORD, all his faithful people! The LORD preserves those who are true to him, but the proud he pays back in full.

Psalm 33:5

The LORD loves righteousness and justice; the earth is full of his unfailing love.

Psalm 37:9

For those who are evil will be destroyed, but those who hope in the LORD will inherit the land.

Psalm 37:25

I was young and now I am old, yet I have never seen the righteous forsaken or their children begging bread.

Psalm 37:38

But all sinners will be destroyed; there will be no future for the wicked.

Psalm 41:2

The LORD protects and preserves them-- they are counted among the blessed in the land-- he does not give them over to the desire of their foes.

Psalm 50:5

"Gather to me this consecrated people, who made a covenant with me by sacrifice."

Psalm 94:14

For the LORD will not reject his people; he will never forsake his inheritance.

Psalm 109:13

May his descendants be cut off, their names blotted out from the next generation.

Proverbs 2:22

but the wicked will be cut off from the land, and the unfaithful will be torn from it.

Isaiah 14:20

you will not join them in burial, for you have destroyed your land and killed your people. Let the offspring of the wicked never be mentioned again.

Isaiah 49:6

he says: "It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."

The above statements found in the bible is enough to nail those absurd a claims made by Christians!!!!

Does semen come out from the rib and backbone as christians claim?

Refuting missionaries 

Sperm is stored in the epididymis which is not in the testicles but above them, the sperm which comprises 2 to 5 % of seminal fluid that travels through the epididymis up

Through the vas deferens duct, and around the bladder. Together the seminal vesicle and the prostrate gland, produce 90% of the fluid in semen. This mixture travels through the prostrate and is joined by mucus from the bulbourethral glands, just below the prostrate. 

It is at this point that the semen is fully formed. Compromising both sperm and the seminal fluids as we can see just prior to coming out the body. All components of the semen are mixed near the prostrate, which is centred in the body, between the backbone and the ribs, or between the spine and the chest, which is between the back and front of the abdomen or torso. and the most certainly not in the testicles or in the lower body at all.  

Someone may object by saying the ribs are too high to say "the prostrate is between the backbones and the ribs" to this objection we answer that the head is still between the shoulders even though it is too high and the genitals are still between the legs even though they are too high.

The above explanation should be sufficient that the  answer is NO, Semen does not come out from the ribs or backbone rather it's formed between the two!

So let man consider from what he is created. He is created from an emitted fluid that issued from between the sulb and the tara’ib. (86:5-7)

Shaykh `Abd al-Wahhâb al-Turayrî of IslamToday.com writes:

The phrase “mâ’ dâfiq” (emitted fluid) is not restricted in meaning to sperm but is used in Arabic for both the sperm and the egg. Ibn Kathîr, in his commentary on this verse, writes: “It emanates from the man and the woman, and with Allah’s permission, the child comes forth as a product of both.”

…The words translated as “backbone” (sulb) and “ribs” (tarâ’ib) are not understood in Arabic to belong to the same person. Arabs understand the “sulb” to refer to a part of the male body and the “tarâ’ib” to a part of the female. Ibn Kathîr states: “It refers to the ‘sulb’ of the man and the ‘tarâ’ib’ of the woman…” He then quotes this interpretation on the authority of the Prophet’s companion Ibn `Abbâs. This same understanding is given in all the major classical works of Qur’anic commentary.

breasts (plural) in Arabic is الثديين  althadiiyn. Now interestingly in Ezekiel 23:3 

in the Arabic Bible the word for breasts is Taraib, ترائب,. The question is why 

didn’t they use الثديين althadiiyn and instead used ترائب Taraib? Well the reason 

behind is this is, the word ترائب Taraib describes the female in a whole, unlike 

the word breast الثديين althadiiyn which is specific. The other reason is 

“embarrassment” since Ezekiel 23 is giving a description of two harlots 

and their indecent behaviour, the Arabic Bible thought it would be better 

to use the word ترائب Taraib to describe the actions towards the women in a 

less vulgar way and avoid using names of specific body parts for the readers. 

For example the Arabic Bible would translate it as “ the (women) were 

touched by men” not “their (breast) were pressed by men” the wordings 

change the description portrayed by the author.

ترائب Taraib  is a unique Arabic word for women.

Lane’s Lexicon says:

Tara’ib: … most of the authors on strange words affirm decidedly that it (tara’ib) is peculiar to women. (Lane’s Lexicon, p.301) 

All of the major commentaries of the Quran confirm that the tara’ib is 

peculiar to women. Ibn Katheer writes in his tafseer (commentary) of the Quran:



It (fluid) emanates from the man and the woman, and with Allah’s permission, 

the child comes forth as a product of both. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer)

Thus when the Quran uses the word “Taraib” it is referring to the women. Now coming to the word sulb. Sulb صُلْبِ mean “loins” we can also confirm this from the Arabic Bible. Exodus 1:5 used the word صُلْبِ sulb to describe the offspring of Jacob. صُلْبِ sulb is a masculine word and will not be used for the female gender, its only used for males. Thus, صُلْبِ sulb and tara’ib are separate from each other male and female.  

So Surah 86 is not referring to the man only, rather the verse is referring to man and women together. “Fluid that issued from between the man and the women”

"Sperm" between the backbone & ribs is not the correct reading. The arabic word used in Surah 86:6 is مَاءٍ (water) not نُطْفَةً (sperm). The correct reading should be "water" between the backbone & ribs. From context Surah 86:5-8 is speaking about the creation of man.

synecdochical 

1. adjective

    using the name of a part for that of the whole or the whole for the part; or the special for the general or the general for the special; or the material for the thing made of it

   synonyms:synecdochic

   figurative, nonliteral

   (used of the meanings of words or text) not literal; using figures of speech

For the record there are various way (methods) of explaining this. Sulb means male and Tara'ib means female. You can also using modern day technology see where the fetus or developed baby is situated the positioning showing its between the backbone and ribs of the mother.

lets the turn the tables

Sperm coming out from David's bowels?

------------

And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy SEED after thee, which shall proceed out of thy BOWLES, and I will establish his kingdom. (2 Samuel 7:12)

And David said to Abishai, and to all his servants, Behold, my son, which came forth of my BOWELS, seeketh my life: how much more now may this Benjamite do it? let him alone, and let him curse; for the Lord hath bidden him. (2 samuel 16:11)

Thy seed also had been as the sand, and the offspring of thy bowels like the gravel thereof; his name should not have been cut off nor destroyed from before me. (Isaiah 48:19)

Slavery in the bible!

Bible Slavery !!

Genesis 9:25-27

And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

Genesis 16:8-9

And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence camest thou? and whither wilt thou go? And she said, I flee from the face of my mistress Sarai. And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself under her hands.

Genesis 17:12-13

And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised.

Genesis 24:35-36

And the LORD hath blessed my master [Abraham] greatly; and he is become great: and he hath given him flocks, and herds, and silver, and gold, and menservants, and maidservants, and camels, and asses. And Sarah my master's wife bare a son to my master when she was old: and unto him hath he given all that he hath.

Genesis 26:12-14

Then Isaac sowed in that land, and received in the same year an hundredfold: and the LORD blessed him. And the man waxed great, and went forward, and grew until he became very great: For he had possession of flocks, and possession of herds, and great store of servants.

Exodus 12:44

But every man's servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof.

Exodus 20:17

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Exodus 21:2, 7, 20-21, 26-27, 32

If thou buy a Hebrew servant.... (v.2)

And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant.... (v.7)

If a man smite his servant or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall be surely punished; notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished, for he is his money. (vv.20-21)

And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake. (vv.26-27)

If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver. (v.32)

Exodus 22:2-3

If a thief ... have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.

Leviticus 19:20

And whosoever lieth carnally with a woman, that is a bondmaid, betrothed to an husband, and not at all redeemed, nor freedom given her; she shall be scourged; they shall not be put to death, because she was not free.

Leviticus 22:11

If the priest buy any soul with his money....

Leviticus 25:39, 44-46

And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee.... (v.39)

Thy bond-men and thy bond-maids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you: of them shall ye buy bond-men and bond-maids. Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land. And they shall be your possession. And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession, they shall be your bond-man forever. (vv.44-46)

Deuteronomy 5:21

Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Deuteronomy 15:12

And if thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman be sold unto thee....

Deuteronomy 20:10-11, 14

When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it. And it shall be, if it make thee answer of peace, and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people that is found therein shall be tributaries unto thee, and they shall serve thee. (vv.10-11)

But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself. (v.14)

Joshua 9:23

Now therefore ye are cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen, and hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my God.

Luke 12:46-47

The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

Luke 17:7-9

But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat? And will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not.

1 Corinthians 7:21-22

Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant.

Ephesians 6:5

Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God.

Colossians 3:22

Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ.

Colossians 4:1

Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.

1 Timothy 6:1-5

Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort. If any man teach otherwise ... he is proud, knowing nothing.... From such withdraw thyself.

Titus 2:9-10

Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God.

1 Peter 2:18

Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.

Deuteronomy brethren from amongst them.

There have been many debates between Jews, Christians, and Muslims over this very important prophecy, all providing their evidence, fact, logic, reasoning, and understanding to prove their points as to who this prophecy is referring, whether it is Jesus (pbuh) or Muhammad (pbuh).

It eventually occurred to me that all evidence brought forth were from different versions of the Bible, Bible dictionaries, commentaries, etc., some being study Bibles in which footnotes and references are contained.

With respect to all arguments from the three faiths, I ask you to take into consideration that the versions of the Bibles used were in the English language. These were interpretations from other English versions, restricting you from the original text and therefore, restricting you from its true meaning. This encouraged and motivated me to further my studies and research on Deuteronomy 18:18 more in depth and accurately from the Aramaic scriptures directly.

As many would agree, I was more interested in reading this passage from the original Aramaic text as I naturally like to analyze every word, expression, and sentence structure in general. Please note that a literal translation is not necessarily an interpretation and therefore, one has to be extra careful on this subject matter. Yes, you can provide a literal translation, however, that does not necessarily mean that you are providing its meaning or interpretation. One good example of this is the expression “Don’t cry over spilled milk”. This can be translated into any language, but it will be translated as just that. We know that there is a meaning behind this expression. This is the difference between “literal translation” and “interpretation”.

Aramaic, like Arabic, goes very deep into the choices of words and expressions used. One word can be translated in many different ways. The Bible contains many expressions and terms that were in later times translated and interpreted literally, for

example, using the term “Son of God”. In the Aramaic and Hebrew languages, this is an expression used regularly meaning, “Godly Person”. It’s good to keep this in mind when studying Biblical or religious speech in general.

In regards to the Torah, there are two main versions in Aramaic: 1) Targum, which is an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew, also known as Onkelos, and 2) the Peshitta which is a Bible containing the Aramaic language closest to that of Jesus (pbuh). I would sooner trust the Peshitta only because it is not a translation from another language, but is known to have been written in Aramaic itself.

In Deuteronomy 18:18, the word “Brethren” is used. In some versions, the word “Brothers” is used as well. From the English perspective, it is difficult to determine what the word “brethren” is truly referring to in this passage. Could it mean biological brethren from the same lineage? Or perhaps could it mean brethren of the same faith regardless of family relations?

In theEnglish language, “brethren” can have five definitions:

Brother of same parents

Half-brother (same father) [which in the case of Ishmael and Isaac] Relative, kinship, same tribe

Each to the other (reciprocal relationship)

(fig.) of resemblance

The Aramaic plays a very important role here because the only way to know exactly what this word means is by reading the passage from the original text. Although there are different words used in the English Bibles, there is only one and the same word used in the Aramaic. Proper examination will produce a true and clear understanding as to whom the prophecy is referring.

In Genesis, we see that Abraham (pbuh) had two wives1, Sarah and Hagar, and between them brought forth two sons who were destined to be prophets, Ishmael and Isaac, of course, Ishmael being the firstborn son who gains the right of inheritance according to Jewish law.2 Therefore, there were to be two lineages out of Abraham (pbuh), both destined to be great nations. From Isaac ultimately arose Jesus (pbuh), the Israeli lineage, and from Ishmael, ultimately arose Muhammad (pbuh), the Arab lineage.

The argument here is really between the Christians and the Muslims because according to the Jews, the Prophet which Deuteronomy 18:18 is referring to has not yet arrived. Is it referring to Jesus (pbuh) or Muhammad (pbuh)? 

Let me first put forth the logic and understanding behind this. Yes, the reference does use the English word “Brethren” which could mean the relationship between the descendants of Isaac and Ishmael. Or it could mean the relationship amongst the descendants of Isaac only

We will find this reference in the New Testament as well. In John 1:20-21 John, without hesitation, admits that he is not the Christ. Then he also admits that he is not Elias. What should interest you most is his next statement. He admits that he is not “that Prophet”. The exact quote is as follows:

John 1:20-21 “And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias?3 And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.”4

You cannot help but notice that there are three entities mentioned in this passage – 1) the Christ (Jesus), 2) Elias, and 3) That Prophet. Therefore, the ultimate question is, “Who is that Prophet?”

                                        Argument One

According to Christian scholars such as C.I. Scofield, in his study bible, you will find a reference note by the words “that Prophet” referring back to Deuteronomy 18:18. Therefore, if Deuteronomy 18:18 was referring to Jesus (pbuh), then it would have made sense to insert the reference note by the word “Christ” instead. If this being the case, then Deuteronomy 18:18 could not have been referring to Jesus (pbuh) but instead to another Prophet.

                                            Argument Two

The passage also says, “like you” meaning that this Prophet will be like Moses (pbuh), not by lineage or race, but by character, life, leadership, religion, etc.. If we compare the life between Moses (pbuh) and Muhammad (), we find many similarities. However, if we compare the life of Jesus () and Moses (), we find major differences. For example – a) Jesus was raised by his parents, b) his ministry did not last long, c) he was born without male intervention, d) his people went against him, e) he has not come with new laws and regulations for mankind, but instead was sent only for the lost sheep of the house of Israel5, f) he did not die a natural death, g) he never married and/or begot children, etc.. 

Whereas, Moses (pbuh) and Muhammad (pbuh) both a) were not raised by their parents, b) both had many years of ministry, c) both were born naturally, d) their people eventually accepted them as prophets and kings, e) both were sent with new laws, regulations, attitudes, manners, etc., and f) they both died a natural death at old age, g) both married and begot children.

There are many arguments that one can make when it comes to this topic, however, I don’t wish to extend this much longer as there are already many great publications on this topic. Therefore, I will make it very brief.

                                      Argument Three

Presented below is Deuteronomy 18:18 in Aramaic from the Peshitta.

This reads:

Nabiya aqeem lahoon min gaw akhyahoon akwatak, wa tal fatgamay b’foomeh: wa nimar lahoon kull-medem d’apuqdayawhee.

Meaning:

“The Prophet will I raise for them from among their (fraternal) brethren (who will be) like you, and I will put my oracles (fatgamay) in his mouth and he will say to them all that I command him”.

The word that is to be examined in this passage is “çìüïya” (akhyahoon) meaning “their

(fraternal) brethren”. It is derived from “bžïžya” (akhaya) which means: “Fraternal brother”

– not of the same race or lineage.7 The Arabic equivalent would be “ي خ ِو  َا” (akhawee) which means: “Brotherly, fraternal.”8

If we go back just 3 verses to Deuteronomy 18:15:

The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken.

Here, Moses (pbuh) is speaking to them directly and says: “...of thy brethren...”, and in ̈

Aramaic we find: (min akhyak). This is the same word found in verse 18. The only difference is grammatical – in verse 15, it states “of THY brethren” whereas in verse 18 it states “among THEIR brethren”. However, they both come from the same word (akhaya) which means ‘Fraternal Brother(

 According to Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary Unabridged Second Edition,

Fraternal means:

“Of or characteristic of a brother, or brothers, brotherly; a society, often secret, of members banded together for mutual benefit or for work toward a common goal.”

The Targum contains the same Aramaic word to describe who these Brethren are. In Hebrew we read: “ֲאֵחיֶהם” (akheyhem) and in Targumic Aramaic we read “ֲאֵחיהוֹן” (akheyhon). It is interesting to note that according to the Targum, it means: “Brothers to the degraded woman.” We know that Hagar was a degraded woman in the Bible, and it was her lineage that this “brethren” is referring to. At that time, there could not have been any other brethren other than that between Ishmael and Isaac.

To see a good example of “Brethren” from the same race or lineage, we can refer to the following reference:

Genesis 16:12 “And he (Ishmael) will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.”

When we read “...all his brethren” in this case it refers to his own race and lineage, and in this verse we read : (d’kulhoonakhawhee).

The letter (Yud) is not present in word (akhawhee) in this verse. 

In Targumic Aramaic of this verse, we read, “ָכל-ֲאחוִֹהי” 

(kal-akhohee) meaning “all his brethren” with the elimination of the letter “י” (Yod).

I’m stressing on the word  (akhyahoon) because it’s quite different from the

ordinary word that would be used for “their brethren” in Aramaic. 

If this prophet was to be raised from amongst themselves, the same race (Israeli lineage), then it would have specified so in the translation, but it did not. Also, we would have found the Aramaic word to be (akhahoon) instead which means “their brethren” of the same race or

lineage. We can see that this English word “Brethren” has caused some difficulty for scholars such as George Lamsa in his book “New Testament Light”, p. 160, he says:

“The term ‘of your brethren’ is somewhat difficult to explain. Some people wonder why Moses did not say, “from among you”.

The only difference in the two words above is that the first word contains the letter (Yud) which is the smallest letter in the Aramaic alphabet. Although a very small difference, it is great in meaning. In fact, Jesus (pbuh) makes a reference about this in Matthew:

Matthew 5:18 “one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled

The words he uses are: (Yud Hda aw Had serta...) which means: 

“one Yud or one Serta” –

 Yud being the letter, and Serta meaning: “trait, tittle, a line,

dash, scratch, or the very point of a letter”.

The logic and reasoning behind this was to show how serious offense it was to make even the slightest change to the Law (Torah). This is because to make such a slight change is not only forbidden, but can result to a great deal of corruption in the text.

Therefore, the difference between  (akhyahoon) and (akhahoon) is indeed great in meaning. To recap, the different words used for easier understanding, see the list below:

(akhyahoon) Their (Fraternal) brethren (plural)

(akhaya) Fraternal brother (singular)

(akhawee) Brotherly, fraternal (general)

Fraternal

Of or characteristic of a brother, or brothers, brotherly; a society, often secret, of members banded together for mutual benefit or for work toward a common goal.

(akhawhee) Their brethren (plural, of the same race or lineage) 

(Jacob’s Sons: Genesis 35:23)

Aramaic is a very unique language. Like Arabic, it is very specific when dealing with males, females, objects (as opposed to humans), family, tribe, race, etc... I will always encourage to study and examine the original scriptures because when it boils down to it, you will never understand your religion until you first understand it in its original form.

I would also encourage further research on this subject. This article is very brief because I wanted to get right to the point. When we compare the similarities between Moses and Muhammad (pbut), we will find many more than what’s specified in this article.

The original text shows that the word (akhyahoon) clearly refers to the lineage of Ishmael and not that of Isaac.

According to Jesus, Deuteronomy 18:15-18 doesn’t not apply to him as that Prophet, here are couple of reasons why.

 First point, Jesus said a Prophet cannot be killed outside Jerusalem (Luke 13:33) yet, you find Jesus was crucified in Golgotha which is located out Jerusalem thus, Jesus by his own admission is not a Prophet hence, Deuteronomy 18:15-18 does not apply to him. Interestingly, according to the Talmud "that Prophet" in Deuteronomy 18 will have the authority to change the law, (Talmud Yavamot 90b). Jesus said he did not come to break the law Matthew 5:17.

 Second point. Jesus said to the Jews, "the kingdom of God will be taken away from them and given to a nation producing its fruit" (Matthew 21:43). If Jesus was that Prophet mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:15-18 then why would the kingdom of God be taken away from the Jews and given to another nation when the "criteria" is, 'God will raise a Prophet from their own brethren'?  This would mean "from your own brethren" is not the Jewish people, rather its referring to someone outside the Jewish nation.

 Finally, Jesus never claimed to be that Prophet from Deuteronomy 18:15-18 why? Because point one self-refutation. Point two, confirmation to the Jews the kingdom of God belonging to them will be given to another nation bearing its fruit. Why didn't read Deuteronomy 18:15-18 at the synagogue to make his case even stronger? Instead he read parts of Isaiah. If Moses really wrote about him as claimed in John 5:46, Luke 24:44 then read from Deuteronomy? (Torah), why read from the Nevi'im written roughly 700 years later? Do you see the problem when Christians try to fit Jesus with Deuteronomy 18. Sorry it doesn't work!

Case closed 

 a prophet who predicts peace must show he is right. Only when his predictions come true can we know that he is really from the LORD.” (Jeremiah 28:9)

 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.(Matt 10:34

Elisha and Yahweh are one?

Elisha has same power as God yet no one calls him God, (Not even Jesus pulled of such a Miracle)

Then Elisha said, "Call her." So he called her, and she stood in the doorway."About this time next year," Elisha said, "you will hold a son in your arms." "No, my lord!" she objected. "Please, man of God, don't mislead your servant!"But the woman became pregnant, and the next year about that same time she gave birth to a son, just as Elisha had told her. (2 kings 4:15-17)

From the above passage we read that, Elisha prophesied the old woman will bear a child in the coming year.  Elisha was fully aware she will live for that time and nothing would happen to her and her giving birth was imminent. Now making such a bold prophecy and then coming true speaks for itself. Now -Let's compare Elisha’s saying to what Yahweh said to Sarah 

The LORD said, “I will surely return to you about this time next year, and Sarah your wife shall have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door behind him. (Genesis 18:10)

Now the LORD was gracious to Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did for Sarah what he had promised. Sarah became pregnant and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the very time God had promised him. (Genesis 21:1-2)

What a similarity Elisha's work is no different to Yahweh’s, on the other hand Jesus never prophesied anything like Yahweh. If Jesus is supposed to be co-equal o God, why then is he less powerful then Elisha?

Did Jesus ever call himself "THE SON OF GOD?"

Korede a Nigerian Christian apologist follower of David wood  failed the challenge. 

Korede our Nigerian prince has  made a fool of himself taking up the challenge. The very bible that he loves more then anything has backfired  him. I asked our Christian friends where did Jesus ever call himself "the Son of God" anywhere in the bible. And behold! Korede the Nigerian prince thought he will be the redeemer who would save Christians from humiliation by showing us a few verses from the bible where Jesus called himself "the Son of God".  First Let us read Korede's response to the question.

--------

John 9:35

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?

John 10:36

Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

John 11:4

When Jesus heard that, he said, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby.

John 11:27

She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.

John 19:7

The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.

----------------

Wait! by looking at the given verses Korede is correct. The New Testament does have Jesus calling himself  the "Son of God". Looks can be deceiving, do not get fooled by what you read in the English translation as we will show you how easily translations change what the original says. Interestingly, the original Koine Greek does not say "the Son of God", but rather "a Son of God" There is no definite article in any of the verses quoted by Korede.

Let's break it down 

For example Many english translations translate John 10 verse 36 which Korede used have jesus refer to himself as “THE Son of God,” while in the greek text the definite article "the, i.e ho/thon" is absent , the greek has jesus calling himself as “A Son of God”, and not as “THE Son of God”. Refer to the ASV, ERV, NIV etc. which have excluded the word "the" or either its in brackets as in ASV. Now what can the translator do, to translate it correctly while not having jesus being called as "a" son?? they translate it as "i am god's son". Refer to NIV, ASV, DBY etc and YNG traslates it as “Son of God I am?”. Thus its Not The son of god/ but a son of god 

One of the quotes Korede used is from John 9:35  which reads  "the son of man" and not "son of God". The NIV which goes back to the earliest manuscriptes omits "son of God" thus,  Korede is only fooling himself with the KJV 

John 19:7 the Greek word Uion is used :

υἱὸν

uion

5207

a son

John 10:36 the Greek word Uios is used :

υἱὸς

uios

5207

a son

John 11:4 the Greek word Uios is used :

υἱὸς

uios

5207

a son

John 11:27 the Greek work Uios is used:

υἱὸς

uios

5207

a son

-----------

Now, the only way  Korede can snake his way out is, by  proving the Koine Greek is wrong. Korede is basing his whole argument by depending on the KJV which by consensus does not go back to the earliest manuscripts, not to forget has many defects. One must also clarify that "A SON OF GOD" is not the same as "THE SON OF GOD"

We know from the bible Jews were also the sons of God (Psalm 82:6), puttin them equally on the same level as Jesus and his son ship with God. Jews never consider themselves as the literal sons of God rather the Hebrew phrase "son of God" would means a godly, pious person, a man of God.

Now lets take a look at the koine Greek word Huios. 

Strongs concordance 5207

huios: a son

Original Word: υἱός, οῦ, ὁ

Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine

Transliteration: huios

Phonetic Spelling: (hwee-os')

Short Definition: a son, descendent

Definition: a son, descendent.

Notice the definite article "the" is not used.

--------------------

There is another issue that need burying. David wood, koredes mentor answered this very question by quoting a passage from Luke.

"All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him." (Luke 10:22)

-------

These words are repeated verbatim in Matthew 11:27, the reason being that Luke and Matthew both lifted this passage out of Q. But these words emanate from the third layer of Q, the layer added by Christians around 70 C.E ( B.L. Mack, the lost Gospel: The Book of Q & Christian Origins pp. 89, 172.) neither of the two earliest layers including the original Q as kept by the very first followers of Jesus, containing anything about of the deity of Jesus Christ 

As for those Christian linguist unfortunately, Granville Sharp Rule is not applicable on of the above cites verses. In fact for the record Granville Sharp Rule has been under scrutiny and disputed by many Koine Greek scholars. Using Granville Sharp will not help you in this case.

There you go two birds with one stone. Korede needs to drown himself from shame UNLESS HE CAN SHOW US WHERE JESUS CALLED HIMSELF "THE SON OF GOD".

SHAME! 

Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.

(Matthew 5:9)

For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

(Roman 8:14)

You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus

(Galatians 3:26)

Case closed