Friday, April 16, 2010

Jesus or Muhammad This Friday, Saturday, and Sunday

It's that time again. We'll be doing five episodes of "Jesus or Muhammad" this weekend (with special guest Walid Shoebat on Saturday and Sunday!). If you don't get ABN via satellite, you can watch online at ABN's website. Here's the schedule.

10:45 P.M. (Eastern Standard Time)

2:30 P.M.
9:45 P.M.

2:30 P.M.
9:45 P.M.


GreekAsianPanda said...

I'll be watching. Can't wait to see what topics will be discussed =)

characterbuilder said...

Yes! I have been waiting about 3-4 weeks... for J or M. Let's get it on!

Blessing Bro. David & Sam. May the mighty Lord Jesus fill you with wisdom and knowledge to speak the uncompromising truth in love.

Nakdimon said...

Hi David,

Anything on the topix? I think an interesting topic would be Paul vs Muhammad or Textual integrity of the NT.


characterbuilder said...

Hi David,

Where was Sam last night?

minoria said...

Hello Odo:
Great you are debating in Paul Williams' blog.I have entered the following info(dont know if it will appear)and it's incomplete anyway,but so you will know I am trying to answer his claims also,to help out a bit.This is what I wrote:

"Hello Paul:
You have to take into consideration context.
1.Jesus tells the people to follow the PHARISEES(they have the "seat of Moses")in MATT 23:2-3.
2.By "seat of Moses" means interpretation,application of MOSAIC law,written law.It doesn't include the Pharisees' adherence to the ORAL law.
We know because of MATT 15:1-9.He cites death for dishonoring parents in the Written Law but rejects the ORAL law(later put into writing in 180 AD,the MISHNA).
3.Capital punishment had been taken away from the Jewish leaders in 6 AD(Talmud),confirmed by JOHN 18:31(Pilate and Jewish leaders).
4.It's a historical fact the Pharisees had the policy:"Obey the Romans,capital punishment is out of our power,we won't apply it."
5.Jesus confirms acceptance of obeying Roman law(like the Pharisees):"Give to Ceaser was is Ceaser's,to God what is God's"(separation of synagogue and state):MARK 12:17/MATT 22:21/LUKE 20:25
6.Most scholars believed JOHN 8:1-11(woman caught in adultery) as based/high probability of an being authentic ORAL tradition that ended up in the NT.
7.The 2 greatests Pharisee teachers HILLEL and YOHANAN BEN ZAKKAi were flexible about the application of Mosaic Law,and Jesus would have approved of them.One lived one generation before,another 1 generation after.
All this corroborative evidence shows Jesus would not have been for application of death for apostasy."
It's incomplete but like 80% there.Thanks for fighting the good fight.

LouisJ-B said...

Am i the only one listening to the shows on ABN radio?

minoria said...

Hi Louis J-B:
I watch Jesus or Muhammad on the internet,I don't listen to it on the radio,don't know how to evendo it.

minoria said...

To continue about Jesus and death for apostasy:
MATT indicates he rejected the Oral law,it's my strong impression in the famous "you have HEARD (Oral law?)but I say to you"in MATT 5:31-32/5:33-34/5:38-39/5:43-44.
It complements MATT 15:1-9 which has Jesus denouncing "tradition"/"commandments of men".

ABOUT MATT 5:17-20:
I think where it says Jesus came not to abolish the Law and Prophets but to FULFILL them,and "not one iota will disappear to ALL is fulfilled" means the prophecies of the FIRST coming.Because the prophecies of the Second coming weren't fulfilled.

Or of Heaven as Matt puts it."He who teaches others to disobey the least law will be the least in the Kingdom of God" can't refer to 1st century Palestine.It would refer to God's actual rule here where all obey.In Judaism we have that expression to express actual rule of God,like in:"Our Father...your KINGDOM come,your will be done,on EARTH as in heaven."

Matt in MATT 23:2-3(follow the Pharisees advice,don't apply death sentence)/MATT 22:21(give to Ceaser what is...)would be contradicting himself.

otto said...

Hi Miniora,

I don’t see any of your comments on Pauls blog and was wondering if you are being censored. If that’s the case I will take your arguments/ideas and submit them myself, maybe then he will approve. Ok bye for now

minoria said...

Hi Odo,I did submit but now they are not accepted.Maybe I have been excluded for criticism of Islam,or maybe it would have happened anyway.
From what I know Paul Williams approves of death for apostates in Islam.I asked him about 2 times and no answer.
Now with his article "Jesus was for killing apostates" it seems to confirm it.Because what does it matter to him 2 cents if one gives good reasons contrary to it?
On the second hand if he can somehow,to his satisfaction,show it then it's like saying:"Jesus was for it,Moh. was for it,so it's God's will."

So if killing apostates is ok for him,then by logic killing BLASPHEMERS of Islam(critics) would be ok,I assume.That's us and other non-Muslims.

minoria said...

As I said before,Jesus was a JEW.Jewish thinkers have always said Mosaic law is ONLY for the Jews.
Logically Mosaic law would not be for them.What would be for us?
We have the BOOK of JUBILEES(2nd cent. BC)which states the laws for the Gentiles/ ACTS 15,the Council of Jerusalem / the 7 Noahide laws in the Talmud.Nothing there about killing apostates.

Does Paul Williams know all this when writing his articles?Or what about ST. PAUL and his assertion also that Mosaic law was not for the Gentiles?Strange situation.

minoria said...

I've been going over the "are you the prophet?" debate in JOHN.It seems to me from the evidence it is a Jewish prophet.
We know in Jesus' time they were expecting a PRIESTLY MESSIAH(of Aaron,in other words a Jewish man) and a ROYAL one,maybe also the Messiah ben Joseph(another Jewish man).Messiah can apply to any prophet,not just the son of David one.
I think that shows there is no reason to say the priests by "the prophet"(based on the writings found in Qmran) meant anything other than a Jew.That would show Mohammed is not in JOHN.

minoria said...

Hey Odo:
Just read Paul William's blog.So I am blocked.In reality he never answered most of my objections saying it covered to much ground.In other words the evidence was too strong.I never insulted anybody and why can't one discuss other subjects besides those of the article itself if you think they link to your argument in some way(but for him it was off-topic).
A real discussion is like that,new themes rise,it's a free discussion NOT a rigid debate.
That's why I like ALI SINA's forum,they talk of anything and everything,and the discussion goes in different directions from the initial topic.

Though I didn't offer this in his blog it shows 100% the Koran is false:sura 18:83-86 says Two-Horned literally reached the place where the sun sets,he found it,a muddy spring.Clear text.
It's utterly unscientific,clear proof Islam is false.
In a free discussion one can introduce that argument.Why not?If one is discussing Mohammed in the Bible,one can say:"In addition,what makes the Koran's claims about Moh. in the Bible false is sura 18:83-86 which says the sun...."So since that is false the Koran is not from God."(Soberly said,it was that which for Paul Williams' was "rant".)

In the Spanish forum one Muslim called Junior made alot of overemotional comments about statements soberly made by me:proof the OT says the Messiah would be Yahveh,passeges in NT where Jesus says he's God,the 1 COR 15 accepted by Jesus Seminar(skeptics),etc.

So that thread has been closed today.I think Junior was beginning to really doubt his Muslim faith,in essence he kept saying my proof was no proof but didn't offer evidence based on Jewish culture,the OT text.