Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Works of Martin Luther: with Introductions and Notes

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Islam: a contradiction to reason and logic and evidence

A Muslim asked "Why are Christians allowed to defend Christianity in a presuppositional way, but Muslims are not allowed to do the same?

You can try to do so; but it is contradictory to logic, because Islam claims to be the fulfillment of the OT and NT and comes more than 5 Centuries after the NT events, and yet, contradicts the teachings of the Bible, therefore, Islam is proven wrong.

Simple answer: Because Islam came almost 600 years later; yet contradicts the Bible in key areas. Because Islam has no historical evidence to back up its claims that it is a fulfillment of the OT and NT; yet claims to affirm the OT and the NT, and yet contradicts what the OT and NT teach.

The Jews of the NT - Jesus and His disciples/apostles were steeped in the OT and quoted from it extensively.

The Arabs and Muhammad did not quote from the OT (there is one allusion; Qur'an 5:45), and did not know much of the content of the NT, called the "Injeel" (a corrupted form of the word, "Evangel".) (except that it existed, and was the revelation/message of Jesus, and that Jesus had faithful disciples who were honest; and that Jesus was Al Masih (The Messiah), virgin born, and did miracles, and is the son of Mary.

Jay Smith demonstrates that the Bible does not refer to Muhammad, the founder of Islam, even though the Muslims are forced to try to find him in the previous Scriptures, the Torah (The law of Moses; Arabic - Taurat تورات) and the Injeel انجیل (Gospel), because of 2 verses in the Qur'an. (Surah 7:157; Surah 61:6). See more in this series from Jay Smith, highlighted by AnsweringMuslims.com.

Surah 7:157

"Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honored him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him - it is those who will be the successful." (Sahih International Version)

Surah 61:6

"And [mention] when Jesus, the son of Mary, said, "O children of Israel, indeed I am the messenger of Allah to you confirming what came before me of the Torah and bringing good tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name is Ahmad." But when he came to them with clear evidences, they said, "This is obvious magic." (Sahih International Version.) See here for the Arabic and English.

The 3 main passages Muslims use to try and claim that Muhammad is prophesied there, are:

1. Deuteronomy 18:15 - this one is very clear in the immediate context of chapter 17 and 18, that the prophet who will come in the future will be a Jew, an Israelite.

"The Lord your God will raise up for a prophet like me, from among your own brothers (same word as "countrymen" in 17:14-15) . . . " Deut. 18:15 (see also Deut. 18:2, "brothers")

מאחיך

(from among your brothers.) ( I cannot figure out how to put the vowel pointing in, but anyone with a Bible original language software program can see it, and perhaps the Hebrew is on the web somewhere.)

“When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, ‘I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,’ ¹⁵you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman." Deuteronomy 17:14-15

More NT fulfillment of Deut. 18:15 in Jesus.

The context is so clear here, it should be embarrassing for Muslims to try and use this.

Jesus fulfilled Deut. 18:15 in Acts 3:22.

2. Song of Solomon 5:16 - Jay did a good job of defeating that; the context, beginning in verse 10, is Solomon's bride/lover/wife in Jerusalem, talking about Solomon, her beloved. Dr. White also proved this Muslim apologetic method wrong some time ago.

3. John chapters 14 and 16, and the Greek word, παρακλητος (parakletos)

On the Greek word, "parakletos" in John 14:16-17; 14:26; and John 16:7, with 16:12-15, it helps to have a visual of the Greek word in question.

παρακλητος - the true Greek word in the text. "helper", "counselor", "comforter"

περικλυτος - the word the Muslims claim was originally there in Greek. In order to Muslims to make it work, they have to change 3 key letters of the word. Jay Smith makes a great point that in Arabic, it is a consonantal language, the verbs are sounds in between the letters and most of the time, they are not even written. The Muslim apologists, many times, try to equate Greek with Arabic and say that the vowels in Greek could have been different. They are using an Arabic language characteristic and imposing it upon the Greek language.

John 14:16-17

"I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; ¹⁷ that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you."

"Helper" - is the translation of the Greek, παράκλητον - the accusative form (the accusative is the object of the verb "to give", and in Greek the accusative form changes the last letter in this word in order to show that it is the object of the verb) from παράκλητος (nominative, dictionary form).

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." (John 14:26)

Reasons why it makes no sense for Muslims to use John 14 and 16 and the word "parakletos" to try and prove their apologetic.

1. There is no manuscript evidence and no textual variant of this word in John 14 or 16, so for Muslims to just make up the changes in the three letters is a massive problem, and many times downright deceptive. Parakletos means "the one called alongside" to help or comfort or advocate for; "the comforter", "the helper", "the counselor". The Greek word does not mean "praised one" or "glorious one". (I don't understand Jay Smith saying it means "glorious one", when "Ahmad" احمد (another form of Mohammad- محمد , "the praised one" - you can see the root, hmd, حمد , which means "praise" in Arabic.) in the Qur'an 61:6 means "praised one".

2. The parakletos is "the Spirit of truth" who will be in you. Obviously, this is about the Holy Spirit who would baptize believers and indwell the disciples and all believers (John 7:37-39). It cannot be about Muhammad, because Muhammad is in no sense "in" them. The fulfillment of this is clear in Acts chapter 2 and explained in John 7:37-39 and I Corinthians 6:19-20; 12:13, Galatians 4:6; Ephesians 1:13; 4:30 . It cannot be about Muhammad, who was a human coming almost 600 years later, he was not a spirit.

3. Muhammad does not "abide with them".

4. Muhammad cannot be with the disciples "forever".

5. Muhammad came into existence 570 years after the birth of Christ, so the promise makes so sense for the disciples of Jesus at all, much less for other Christians.

6. Muhammad is not a spirit, but a man.

7. Muhammad does not glorify Jesus in the way that the NT means.

8. Muhammad was not sent from "the Father". Muslims object to even calling God, "Father". (Surah 112)

The Presupposition that the Bible is true and the God of the Bible is true conforms to reason and logic. A presupposition needs to make sense; and be in conformity to truth and not contradict evidence, or its own claims. Islam makes no logical sense, since it claims to be a third stage in revealed religions, and that Muhammad came to complete Judaism and Christianity. Islam makes no sense, since Muhammad cannot be the "parakletos", the Helper, the comforter of John 14 and 16. Islam makes no sense, since it affirms the OT and the NT (Surah 2:136; 5:46-48; 5:68; 10:94; 29:46); yet contradicts the content of those same Scriptures. And Islam makes no sense, because it flatly denies the crucifixion and death of Jesus (Surah 4:157); one of the most accepted historical facts of history; and something that even skeptic unbelievers like John Dominic Crossan and Bart Ehrman affirm as historical fact.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Select Works of Martin Luther: an Offering to the Church of God in "the Last Days"

There have been smaller English collections of Luther's writings published, now available free on-line. One such collection was a four-volume set put out by the Reverend Henry Cole (1792-1858): Select works of Martin Luther: an offering to the church of God in "the last days".

Three of the volumes were easy to locate (but volume four was problematic, Google titled it incorrectly). These books are available for purchase as reprints. The original printings can be expensive.

Volume One (read online, PDF, txt) Volume Two (read online, PDF, txt) Volume Three (read online, PDF, txt)
Volume Four

Contents:

Volume One
Concerning Christian Liberty

Exposition of the Fifty-first Psalm

Selections from the Commentaries on the Romans, Galatians, Psalms, etc.

Preface to the Epistle to the Romans

Use of the Law (Galatians 3:19)

Continuance of the Law (Galatians 3:19)

Difference between Faith and Hope

Charity no Faith

Faith standing in the power of God (1 Peter 1)

How to meditate upon, and apply, the Death and Sacrifice of Christ (Galatians 1:4)

The Sin against the Holy Ghost (Matthew 12)

Christ delighting in the beauty of the righteous (Psalm 45:11)

Christ's people all righteous (Isaiah 60:21)

True Faith, true Obedience, and true Holiness (1 Peter 1:13)

Saving work of the Holy Spirit, and his cry of Abba Father in the Heart (description of true Prayer) (Galatians 4:6)

Internal Warfare of the Child of God (Galatians 5:17)

Gratitude to God for his divine teaching (Psalm 117:21)

The Saint's Triumph over Death (Psalm 118:17)

SERMONS

The Lost Sheep (Luke 15)

The Good Shepherd (John 10)

The Seven Loaves (Mark 8)

Concerning Two sorts of Men in respect of Faith, and what Faith is (Hebrews 11)

The Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16)

The strength and growth of Faith and Love (Ephesians 3)

The Ten Lepers (Luke 17)

The Sum of the Christian Life( 1 Timothy 1)

Of the coming of Christ, and the signs that shall precede the last day (Sermon of Consolation) (Luke 21)

Volume Two
Exposition of the Seventeenth Chapter of the Gospel of Saint John

The Consolatory Tesseradecad of Martin Luther for the Weary and Heavy Laden

The last words of David (2 Samuel 23:1-7)

The Three Creeds or Confession of the Christian Faith, Used by Consent in the Church

Martin Luther's Explanation of the Lords Prayer for the Simple Among the People

A Treatise on Good Works

Professors and Prophets known by their Fruits (Matthew 7:16)

Prophets and Teachers of Miracles rejected (Matthew 7:22)

False Prophets (Matthew 7:1-5)

Volume Three
Commentary on the First Twenty-two Psalms

Volume Four
Commentary on the First Twenty-two Psalms

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Luther on Justification- "I myself, even though I teach it publicly have a great difficulty in believing it privately"

Recently, I was sent this obscure Luther quote:

“There is no religion in the whole world that teaches this doctrine of justification. I myself, even though I teach it publicly, have a great difficulty in believing it privately” (Werke, 25, p. 330, in Franca., p. 158).

If you search out this quote you'll come across a few pages of similar content. For instance this web page is entitled: Luther Thought He Was Divine! The quote is one of a handful of out-of-context quotes painting Luther as a gross antinomian. This quote is used to prove justification by faith alone is a "doctrine ... so bizarre that even Luther himself could scarcely manage to believe in it." Luther didn't even believe what he taught?

Polemical Source
The quote was admittedly taken from a Roman Catholic secondary source: Fr. Leonel Franca, S.J., A Igreja, a Reforma, e a Civilização [The Church, the Reformation, and Civilization] (Rio de Janeiro, 1934). "Fr. Leonel Edgar da Silveira Franca, S.J., one of the founders of the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and its first Rector (1941 -1948)." The quote can be found on page 151 of his book:

escreve o próprio LUTERO: "Nenhuma religião há, em toda a terra que ensine esta doutrina da justificação: Eu mesmo, ainda que a ensine publicamente, com grande dificuldade a creio em particular". Weimar, XXV, 330.

Primary Source
Whoever pulled this quote from Franca's The Church, the Reformation, and Civilization had to translate it into English, so it's twice removed from the original Latin. However, the reference was helpful: WA 25, 330 (cf. Exegetica opera Latina, Volume 23, 140).

Est autem nulla religio iu orbe terrarum, quae hanc sententiam de iustificatione admittat, et nos ipsi privatim aegre eam credimus, quanquam publice eam doceamus. Ideo quoque diligentius hic locus cognosci debet, quod sit ceu fundamentum, quo Novum testamentum seu Euangelion nititur, qui solus nos et religionem nostram ab omnibus aliis religionibus distinguit. Soli enim Christiani hunc locum credunt et sunt iusti, non quia ipsi operantur, sed quia alterius opera apprehendunt, nempe passionem Christi. Qui igitur hunc articulum credit, ille tutus est ab omnibus erroribus et necessario ei aderit Spiritus sanctus. Neque enim sine Spiritu sancto doceri aut cognosci potest. Qui autem ab hoc articulo exciderunt, illi expositi sunt omni vento falsae doctrinae.

This quote is from Luther's material on Isaiah 53. Some of the material is found in WA 31(2), some of it is found in WA 25 (pp. 79-401). The material in WA 31 comprises of lectures transcribed and recorded by those who heard Luther give these lectures. The material in WA 25 comprises of scholia. Therefore, taken together, Luther's notes and lectures comprise his material on the book of Isaiah. LW chose to translate the material from WA 31 with clarification from Luther's scholia ("... there is neither need nor even justification for relying on the scholia, and we have decided to translate the version closest to Luther himself").

Context
If one compares the scholia and the lectures on Isaiah 53 there is indeed harmony in thought.

The quote above roughly translates:

But there is no religion in the entire world which admits this teaching of justification, and we ourselves believe it in private with difficulty, though we publicly teach it. Therefore this doctrine must carefully be known, as being the foundation, which the gospel and New Testament is based. It alone distinguishes us from all other religions. Christians believe they are justified, not because they themselves work, but because they receive another's works, namely, Christ's work. Therefore he who believes this article is safe from all errors and necessarily will be with the Holy Spirit. For without the Holy Spirit it cannot be taught or known. But he that falls from this article are exposed to every wind of false doctrine.

This scholia would fit into this section 5 of Luther's lecture on Isaiah 53:

4. Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.
This states the purpose of Christ’s suffering. It was not for Himself and His own sins, but for our sins and griefs. He bore what we should have suffered. Here you see the fountain from which St. Paul draws countless streams of the suffering and merits of Christ, and he condemns all religions, merits, and endeavors in the whole world through which men seek salvation. Note the countless sects who to this day are toiling to obtain salvation. But here the prophet says, “He for us.” It is difficult for the flesh to repudiate all its resources, to turn away from self, and to be carried over to Christ. It is for us who have merited nothing not to have regard for our merits but simply to cling to the Word between heaven and earth, even though we do not feel it. Unless we have been instructed by God, we will not understand this. Therefore I delight in this text as if it were a text of the New Testament. This new teaching which demolishes the righteousness of the Law clearly appeared absurd to the Jews. For that reason the apostles needed Scripture, Surely He has borne our griefs. His suffering was nothing else than our sin. These words, OUR, US, FOR US, must be written in letters of gold. He who does not believe this is not a Christian. Yet we esteemed Him. We thought that He was suffering because of His own sin, as it were. In the eyes of the world and of the flesh Christ does not suffer for us, since He seemed to have deserved it Himself. This is what the prophet says here too, that He was judged guilty in the eyes of the world. It is therefore difficult to believe that such a one suffered for us. The Law is that everybody dies for his own sins. Natural reason, and divine as well, argues that everybody must bear his own sin. Yet He is struck down contrary to all law and custom. Hence reason infers that He was smitten by God for His own sake. Therefore the prophet leads us so earnestly beyond all righteousness and our rational capacity and confronts us with the suffering of Christ to impress upon us that all that Christ has is mine. This is the preaching of the whole Gospel, to show us that Christ suffered for our sake contrary to law, right, and custom. He expounds more fully what His suffering for us means.

5. He was wounded.
The prophet is eloquent in describing the suffering of Christ. Word by word he expounds it in opposition to the hardened Jews. Do you want to know what it is to bear our sins, that is, what it means that He was wounded? Here you have Christ delineated perfectly and absolutely, since this chapter speaks of Him. Christ is a man, a servant of the Word, who by means of suffering bore our sins. What will the unrestrained Jew answer in opposition to this delineation? From this you must infer how far apart are the teachings of Paul and the pope. Paul clings to Christ alone as the sin bearer. By means of this one word, “Lamb of God” (John 1:29), John the Baptist understands this Levitical sacrifice, that He suffered for the sins of all. It follows, then, that the Law and merits do not justify. Away with the Antichrist pope with his traditions, since Christ has borne all these things! I marvel that this text was so greatly obscured in the church. They note the concern of Scripture that faith without works is dead, and we say the same thing. In public argument, however, we say that works are indeed necessary, but not as justifying elements. Thus anyone may privately come to the conclusion, “It is all the same whether I have sinned or whether I have done well.” This is hard for the conscience to believe, that it is the same and in fact something angelic and divine. Therefore this text draws the following conclusion: “Christ alone bears our sins. Our works are not Christ. Therefore there is no righteousness of works.” Surely none of the papists can escape this fact when he sees Scripture as a whole, that Christ has accomplished all things for justification and therefore we have not done it. Appeal to works, rewards, and merits and make much of them in the realm of outward recompense. Only do not make them responsible for justification and the forgiveness of sins. We can preach and uphold this passage in public, but we can only believe it with difficulty in private. If we preserve this article, “Jesus Christ is the Savior,” all other articles concerning the Holy Spirit and of the church and of Scripture are safe. Thus Satan attacks no article so much as this one. He alone is a Christian who believes that Christ labors for us and that He is the Lamb of God slain for our sins. While this article stands, all the monasteries of righteousness, etc., are struck down by lightning. In the light of this text read all the epistles of Paul with regard to redemption, salvation, and liberation, because they are all drawn from this fountain. A blind papacy read and chanted these and similar words as in a dream, and no one really considered them. If they had, they would have cast off all righteousness from themselves. Hence it is not enough to know and accept the fact. One must also accept the function and the power of the fact. If we have this, we stand unconquered on the royal road, and the Holy Spirit is present in the face of all sects and deceptions. When this doctrine is safe, we firmly stand up to all people, but where this article is lost, we proceed from one error to the next, as we observe in the babbling Enthusiasts and in Erasmus. Our nature is opposed to the function and power of Christ’s Passion. As far as the fact itself is concerned, both the pope and the Turk believe it and proclaim it, but they do not accept its function. As for you, lift up this article and extol it above every law and righteousness and let it be to you a measureless sea over against a little spark. The sea is Christ who has suffered. Your works and your righteousness are the little spark. Therefore beware, as you place your sins on your conscience, that you do not panic, but freely place them on Christ, as this text says, “He has borne our iniquities.” We must clearly transfer our sins from ourselves to Christ. If you want to regard your sin as resting on you, such a thought in your heart is not of God but of Satan himself, contrary to Scripture, which by God’s will places your sin on Christ. Hence you must say: “I see my sin in Christ, therefore my sin is not mine but another’s. I see it in Christ.” It is a great thing to say confidently: “My sin is not mine.” However, it is a supreme conflict with a most powerful beast, which here becomes most powerful: “I behold sins heaped on Christ.” Thus a certain hermit who was extremely harassed by Satan could not evade him, but said: “I have not sinned. Everybody must look upon his conscience as free.” He did not answer well because he did have sin. This is what he should have said: “My sins have been transferred to Christ; He has them.” This is the grafting of the wild olive into the olive tree. It is not without purpose that the prophet uses so many words in this article, since it is necessary for a Christian to know that these are his own sins, whatever they are, and that they have been borne by Christ, by whom we have been redeemed and saved. This is the Savior, etc., from eternal damnation, from death, and from sin. So by this thunderbolt the Law and its righteousness are struck down, as you see Paul treat this matter in detail.

Something further must be noted, lest those who do not feel this despair. There Satan can turn the antidote into poison and the hope into despair. For when a Christian hears these supreme consolations and then sees how weak he is with regard to his faith in them, he soon thinks that they do not apply to him. In this way Satan can turn consolation into distress. But as for you, however weak you are, know that you are a Christian, whether you believe perfectly or imperfectly, even while weakness and a feeling of death and sin remain with you. To such a person we must say: “Brother, your situation is not desperate, but pray together with the apostles for the perfection of your faith.” Paul also struggled with this problem and was deeply disturbed. A Christian is not yet perfect, but he is a Christian who has, that is, who begins to have, the righteousness of God. I say this for the sake of the weak, so that they will not despair when they feel the bite of sin within themselves. They should not yet be masters and doctors but disciples of Christ, people who learn Christ, not perfect teachers. Let it suffice for us to remain with that Word as learners. Therefore, however perfect and absolute the teaching of Christ is that affirms that all our sins belong to Christ, it is not perfect in our life. It is enough for us to have begun and to be in the state of reaching after what is before us. Hence a Christian man must be especially vexed in his conscience and heart by Satan, and yet he must remain in the Word and not seek peace anywhere else than in Christ. We must not make a log or a rock out of the Christian as one who does not feel sin in himself. This is the claim of the exceedingly spiritual Enthusiasts.[LW 17:221-225]

Conclusion
"This doctrine is so bizarre that even Luther himself could scarcely manage to believe in it" hardly follows from Luther's lecture. In context that which was beyond belief was "Christ alone bears our sins. Our works are not Christ. Therefore there is no righteousness of works."

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Seventy Percent of Roman Catholics Do Not Understand The Eucharist

Originally posted on the aomin blog, 04/15/2009

Seventy percent of Roman Catholics do not understand the Eucharist? There's that anti-catholic James Swan again, making stuff up about the one true church. Everyone knows, those who are members of the one true church have the benefit of the infallible magisterium. The papacy has God-given authority keeping Catholics unified!

Actually, what most who may think this about me don't realize is I probably read more Roman Catholic books at this point than Protestant books. I certainly listen to more Catholic broadcasts than Protestant. This particular fact was not something I made up. It comes from the April 6, 2009 broadcast of Catholic Answers Live. Catholic apologist Jim Burnham devoted an hour on "How to Defend and Explain the Eucharist." You can listen to Jim's statistics in this short clip. Jim says in part,

"Poll after poll in recent years has confirmed that more and more Catholics are mistaken... they have misguided views about the Eucharist. it used to be everybody understood that the Eucharist was Jesus. it was the true flesh and blood... the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus under the appearance of bread and wine. And now more recent polls suggest that sometimes up to fifty percent depending on how the question is phrased, sometimes as many as seventy percent of Catholics can't identify that core Catholic belief..."

So, if I were to ask seven out of ten Catholics to explain the Eucharist, according to Burnham, I'd probably get a few different answers, or maybe even seven different answers. Here again we find a simple truth, typically ignored by Catholic apologists. Catholic apologists will repeatedly claim a Christian relying on the Bible as his sole infallible authority will produce confusion. They claim one must have another infallible authority, the Papacy. Yet, here is one of their key doctrines, what Burnham calls, "the crown jewel" of the Catholic faith, the Eucharist, and seven out of ten Catholics are confused on it.

In this period of economic crisis, many companies are evaluating their work plan, trying to find ways in which their company is failing and losing money. I submit, If your alleged infallible teaching magisterium is working as Burnham describes, you may want to evaluate the effectiveness of upper management at this point.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Can God Become a Man? Debate between Dr. James White and Abdullah Kunde

1. The audio of the debate: “Can God become a man?” James White vs. Abdullah Kunde

I look forward to getting the video/DVD of this debate later, if there are plans for that (probably at www.aomin.org) but the audio has been available here.

http://neutralbayanglican.org.au/?p=1508

2. Abdullah Kunde, at his blog, answers some of my questions regarding the collection and history of the Hadiths. http://ideologiaeislam.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/debate-audio-can-god-become-a-man/

I learned a lot here from Abdullah about other collections of Hadiths حدیث (Ahadith – احادیث plural in Arabic) that I had not known about before. I had heard of Imam Malik before and even seen the Al Muwatta mentioned in Muslim writings; however, I did not know exactly what this book was and when it was written and that it is also considered an orthodox collection of Hadith. It also has jurisprudence (laws and rulings = Fiq = فقه) in it.

He mentions several earlier (than Al Bukhari and Al Muslim) collections of Hadith that are shorter.

1. Imam Ibn Shihab az Zuhri

2. Abu Hanifah Kitab Athar

3. Imam Malik Al Muwatta

See Abdullah’s explanation in the combox as to why we don’t hear about these Hadith collections more often.

It is very interesting to me that most or all of the latter six official collections of Sunni Hadith were done by ethnic Persians ( Iranians). Look them up and google them for details. (see also at the end of this article)

Abdullah shows that Muslims also disagree with each other on the dates of when things were written down and compiled. The dating seems to disagree with the source that I cited there.

3. Abdullah Kunde responds to the issue of “Category Mistakes”

http://ideologiaeislam.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/category-of-mistakes/

See my initial response at the com-box. I have made some changes, additions, corrections, clarifications here.

Thanks for this fleshing out of the issues of categories and category errors.

Abdullah wrote:

1) Perfect, in the absolute sense. This can only be applied to God, for the reasons I suggested, primarily His being Self-Subsistent (without need).

My response: It seems to me that you and all Muslims demand that the incarnation has to mean that the human nature of Jesus has to be perfect in the sense of category # 1, that is “unlimited, eternal, independent, self-existent; omnipotent, omniscient”; but that is not what Christians believe, – except that Jesus in His perfect human was without sin. (John 8:46; Hebrews 4:15; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22) Even the Qur’an speaks of Jesus Al Massih as a “sinless or faultless son” – Surah Maryam 19:19-21. زکیا

(I made a misprint in the combox, but corrected here.) Surah Maryam 19:19 below.

"He said, No; I am only a messenger from Your Lord, that I may bestow on you a faultless son." Surah Maryam 19:19. You can see the last word in Arabic, زکیا , (zakiyyan) which is translated "fault-less", "pure", "most holy", "righteous".

The human nature of Jesus is now glorified after the resurrection; but it came into being at the conception in the womb of Mary – Luke 1:34-35, and so the human nature of Jesus is not eternal into the past.

Jesus is clearly sinless; yet Muhammad asked for forgiveness 3 times in the Qur’an. 47:19; 40:55; 48:2

Since Jesus did have a perfect human nature with respect to other humans and also never sinned, it seems that you have made a category error, because we don’t demand nor teach that Jesus’ human nature is in category # 1. (eternal, self-existent, unlimited, etc.)

Abdullah wrote: 2) Perfect with respect to a genus. I said that ‘perfect’ could be applied to created things, but only within their own context. I said that a car may be called perfect if it is considered to be superior to all other cars. I agreed that a human could be called perfect with respect to other humans, however I affirmed that perfect with respect to a genus is not the same as absolutely perfect, because it can only ever be applied within the category it is referring to (not in an absolute or even comparative sense).

My response: This is the sense that Jesus’ human nature was; and also without sin. That is why He as one person in the incarnation was limited temporarily to time and space while on earth for 33 years and did not know the day of the second coming ( Matthew 24:36) But now in His glorified resurrected body, He surely knows the day of His second coming. The divine nature did not change, rather, as Dr. White was basically seeking to explain, and as all Christians have believed and taught, Jesus the eternal Son, the eternal Word of God (John 1:1-5), voluntarily “emptied Himself” or "did not use His divine privileges", by becoming a man. Philippians 2:5-8. (also John 1:14; Hebrews 10:5; Luke 1:34-35) (see Addendum for more articles on Philippians 2:5-8)

On the Six Official Sunni Hadith Collections:

Granted, this following information is gathered from Wikipedia, but it is convenient and seems true to what I have read. If anyone sees any factual errors, feel free to comment.

1. Sahih Al Bukhari - (810 - 870 AD / 196 - 256 AH = After Hejira (622 AD)) صحیح البخاری - born in Bukhara, - at the time, was part of the Persian Empire, and is ethnically Persian or Tajik, but was later gained by the Russians and is in today southern Uzbekistan. They Tajiks of Bukhara and Samarkand are more related to the Tajiks of Tajikistan, but the Soviet Union divided Uzbekistan and Tajikistan up the way they did so they could “control the minority peoples" within the Soviet Union.

2. Sahih Muslim - lived around 206–261 AH / 821-875 AD - صحیح مسلم - he was also born in the Khorrasan area of Iran, in the city of Nishapour. (Today in Northeast Iran, near Turkmenistan.) Some sources claim he is ethnically Arab.

3. Sunan Abu Dawood - Abu Dawood Sulayman ibn Ash`ath Azdi Sijistani (died, 889 AD)

ابو داود سليمان بن اشعث السجستاني

(commonly known as Abu Dawud, was a noted Persian collector of Hadith. .

He was born in Sistan in east of Iran, (then Persia) and died in 889 AD in Basra.

4. Jami’ Al Tirmidhī (Persian: ترمذی), also transliterated as Tirmizi, full name Abū ‛Īsá Muḥammad ibn ‛Īsá ibn Sawrah ibn Mūsá ibn al Ḍaḥḥāk al-Sulamī al-Sulamī al-Tirmidhī (824–892, i.e. 209 AH – 13 Rajab 279 AH) or 8 October 892 CE was a Persian collector of hadith (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad) The city of Termez was also part of Khorrasan, Persia, but now is in Uzbekistan.

5. as-Sunan as-Sughra (Arabic: السنن الصغرى‎), also known as Sunan an-Nasa'i (Arabic: سنن النسائي) is one of the Sunni Six Major Hadith collections, and was collected by Al-Nasa'i. Al-Nasā'ī (214 – 303 AH/ ca. 829 – 915 AD/CE), The city of Nasa was also in the area of Khorrasan, Persia, but today it is in Turkmenistan, just north of Iran.

6. Sunan Ibn Majah (Arabic: سُنن ابن ماجه) is one of the Sunni Six Major Hadith collections, collected by Ibn Majah. He was also from a Persian area, the city of Qazvin, which is near Tehran in Iran today.

What is really strange about the fact that most of Sunni Hadith collections were done by ethnic Persians; is that today, Iran is officially and mostly Shiite, and the Shiite’s don’t accept the Sunni Hadith collections. Iran became Shiite during the Safavid Dynasty (1502-1732), by the decree of a king of Iran, Shah Ismail I, 1502-1524 AD. Interesting that it is around the same time as the Protestant Reformation in Europe. In becoming Shiite, it seems that the Persians were reacting to the Arab Sunni masters and the Ottoman Sunnis (The Turks). They wanted to assert their Persian identity; and it is very common for Persians today to let westerners know up front that they are not “Arabs”; nor “Turks”. Iranians are still pretty angry at Umar for attacking Iran/Persia in unjust Islamic Jihad and killing millions of people and forcing them to become Muslims. See also about the Shu'ubiyyat movement in Persia/Iran; and here.

Addendum:

A good and thorough article on Philippians 2:5-8, "The Carmen Christi".

The Carmen Christi and the Greek word, "Harpagmos" , by Dr. White.

The CRI Journal article on Philippians 2:5-8 by Dr. White.

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Ear Candy: Kate Bush, '50 Words For Snow'

Here's a rare instance in which Luther, the Reformation, Roman Catholicism, etc. won't be the topic.

My favorite musical artist is Kate Bush. It's been that way since I first heard her album, The Dreaming way back in the early 1980's, which is my favorite recording of all time. I can't say I've enjoyed everything she's put out over the years, but her new album, '50 Words For Snow' will be released in a few days. I'm actually sitting here listening to it at the moment: First Listen: Kate Bush, '50 Words For Snow'. I'm thoroughly enjoying the melancholic ambiance. NPR has posted the entire album to listen to.

Pages

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Works of Martin Luther: with Introductions and Notes

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Islam: a contradiction to reason and logic and evidence

Monday, November 21, 2011

Select Works of Martin Luther: an Offering to the Church of God in "the Last Days"

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Luther on Justification- "I myself, even though I teach it publicly have a great difficulty in believing it privately"

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Seventy Percent of Roman Catholics Do Not Understand The Eucharist

Friday, November 18, 2011

Can God Become a Man? Debate between Dr. James White and Abdullah Kunde

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Ear Candy: Kate Bush, '50 Words For Snow'

Are you Looking for a quote attributed to Luther but can't find a source? Maybe he didn't write it!

Search Beggars All #2

Popular Entries on Martin Luther

Luther's Works etc.

John Calvin

Martin Luther's Mariology

Team Apologian Articles

Labels

Beggars Archive

Pages

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Works of Martin Luther: with Introductions and Notes

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Islam: a contradiction to reason and logic and evidence

Monday, November 21, 2011

Select Works of Martin Luther: an Offering to the Church of God in "the Last Days"

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Luther on Justification- "I myself, even though I teach it publicly have a great difficulty in believing it privately"

Saturday, November 19, 2011

Seventy Percent of Roman Catholics Do Not Understand The Eucharist

Friday, November 18, 2011

Can God Become a Man? Debate between Dr. James White and Abdullah Kunde

Thursday, November 17, 2011

Ear Candy: Kate Bush, '50 Words For Snow'

Are you Looking for a quote attributed to Luther but can't find a source? Maybe he didn't write it!

Search Beggars All #2

Popular Entries on Martin Luther

Subscribe To Beggars All

Luther's Works etc.

John Calvin

Martin Luther's Mariology

Team Apologian Articles

Labels

Beggars Archive