Saturday, September 12, 2020

Fishing for Strictly Doctrinal Like-Minds

 

Click for Artist's Description


CITATION
Rasheed, Muhammad. "Fishing for Strictly Doctrinal Like-Minds." Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed 13 Sep 2020. Pen & ink w/Adobe Photoshop color.


Eric Cook - Name something you were taught in church, but learned it’s not taught in the bible.

#EverythingExcept...
#SALVATIONinJESUSNameActs238 -and-
#WhoJESUSIsMttw123

Muhammad Rasheed - "Rapture."

Eric Cook - It's Bible. But, not the way most learned it.

Muhammad Rasheed - The Rapture isn't in the bible. It was invented by European theologians.

Eric Cook - European theologians created the word rapture...not the original Biblical doctrine of what the rapture is.

Muhammad Rasheed - All humans will taste death before the Last Day. There will be no "Rapture" concept before the end times trials & tribulations.

The only humans who will get to bypass The Day of Judgment and go straight to paradise are:

1) the prophets
2) martyrs
3) children who die before the age of discretion

Eric Cook - Did Enoch taste death? What about Elijah? Never pigeon hole God because of what men have taught you. You need the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues as God gives the utterance (Acts 2:38)... in order to rightly divide the Word of Truth. Bro. Rasheed you neither believe in the Holy Ghost or the gift of Salvation. Which puts us on two different levels of understanding on this topic. Unless you're willing to put down the false doctrine of Islam and believe in the God of the Bible of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Who's name in English, is Jesus (all of Acts ch.2)...this conversation is moot.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "Did Enoch taste death? What about Elijah?"

The prophets enjoyed special benefits due to their outstanding service in their earthy mission.

Eric wrote: "Never pigeon hole God because of what men have taught you."

lol My knowledge comes from my own study in the Word of God not from other men. I don't believe in any form of priest-craft.

Eric wrote: "You need the Holy Ghost speaking in tongues as God gives the utterance (Acts 2:38)..."

Do you want me to believe that Acts was revealed scripture of God? Based on what?

Eric wrote: "in order to rightly divide the Word of Truth."

You think Acts will enable me to do that? How?

Eric wrote: "Bro. Rasheed you neither believe in the Holy Ghost..."

I believe in the strengthening spirit of the Lord thy God. Why wouldn't I?

Eric wrote: "or the gift of Salvation."

Salvation is gifted upon those who believe in the One God who made them, do good, reject evil and repent when they mess up. I believe in this fully.

Eric wrote: "Unless you're willing to put down the false doctrine of Islam..."

Why do you believe that Al-Islam is a "false doctrine?" Based on what?

Eric wrote: "...and believe in the God of the Bible of Abraham Isaac and Jacob."

I wouldn't be a practitioner of the religion of Al-Islam if I didn't believe in the God of the bible, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (peace be upon the prophets!) since this is literally a requirement of my faith.

Eric wrote: "Who's name in English, is Jesus..."

The Christ Jesus, son of Mary (peace be upon them) was the final Hebrew prophet of God in the line of Isaac. Was it the author of Acts who told you to worship the prophet? Why do you believe this author instead of believing God and obeying His command not to worship anything other than Him?

Eric Cook - ...many words don't make you right. They just prove more of what you don't know. Just like Islam is false doctrine so is what you believe Christianity is today.

Unless you believe the the ENTIRE Bible is the unadulterated Word of God, you already err. As the Bible says, without faith it's impossible to please God. This isn't up for debate. You must be born again....as found in the book of Acts. Chapter 2 verse 38. Whether you believe it or not.

Eric Cook - Jhn 8:19 - Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

Jhn 8:24 - I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins

This is Jesus...the one you call the Christ...who is much more than any son of Mary or a mere prophet. Mary, who is also just another woman among women who just happened to be chosen to be blessed. Who also had to be born of the water and the spirit in order to receive salvation. That's in Acts.
I Tim 3:16

And without controversy (no debate) great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

So...my brother, according to the scriptures, whoever taught you is the false prophet. Again, whether you believe it or not.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "many words don't make you right."

Do you believe that your words make you more right than mine? Why?

Eric wrote: "They just prove more of what you don't know."

I asked you many direct questions that you conspicuously ducked and ignored. If what you hold is true, why can't you defend it with logic and reason?

Eric wrote: "Just like Islam is false doctrine..."

Based on what exactly?

Eric wrote: "so is what you believe Christianity is today."

The One God said that the Christians are His people, so I have no reason to believe otherwise. You think you know what I hold, but you clearly do not. Yet you insist what I hold is "false." Why?

Eric wrote: "Unless you believe the the ENTIRE Bible is the unadulterated Word of God, you already err."

I believe in that which was confirmed & fulfilled by the revelation of the Lord thy God and reject that which God confirmed was falsehood. Just as the followers of the Christ did with what the doctors of the Law held.

Eric wrote: "As the Bible says, without faith it's impossible to please God."

Agreed.

Eric wrote: "This isn't up for debate. You must be born again....as found in the book of Acts."

Why do you believe that Acts is from God?

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "God was manifest in the flesh"

This is a blasphemy claimed by only one figure in the entire library of Abrahamic sacred scripture... claims that directly contradict everything God said before and after him. Naturally that means your Paul of Tarsus was the false prophet of legend.

Eric wrote: "So...my brother, according to the scriptures, whoever taught you is the false prophet."

According to the scriptures (Paul's writings cannot pretend to be this) you need to reject Paul's pagan taint, repent of worshiping the Christ and do it no more. Now rather than later.

Eric Cook - ...no. My words don't make me right. Which is why I reference Biblical text.

I never ducked any question but those questions dictated my answers to you. You must begin at 1st grade in order to understand college level material. Your questions are incoherent which is understandable based on your understanding of the Scripture. I don't speak on the Koran because it holds no relevance to me other than it proves also the unadulterated TRUTH of Biblical texts.

For example, the God of the Bible never called christians His people. The apostles and those that followed were first called Christians by those in Antioch. But you don't believe in Acts. So your wouldn't know this.

In order for us to reason together concerning the scriptures the foundations must be established. You have no foundation in the Word of God, therefore you must be instructed in the Word, not reasoned with.

I know ACTS and the rest of the Books of the cannon, along with the Appocryphal writings are all the inspired Word of God.

Act 24:14 - But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
1Co 10:11 - Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Eric Cook - ...Eric didn't write, " God was manifested in the flesh", Paul did under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost (the Spirit of the Almighty God)

2Ti 3:16 - All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "no. My words don't make me right. Which is why I reference Biblical text."

You believe the referenced text that make up your opinions are superior to my own that do the same. Based on what?

Eric wrote: "I never ducked any question..."

Ignoring a direct question is by definition "ducking" it.

Eric wrote: "You must begin at 1st grade in order to understand college level material."

Tell me why do you believe that the writings of Paul of Tarsus were "inspired by God" when his divine demigod doctrine directly contradicts everything that came before it?

Eric wrote: "Your questions are incoherent which is understandable based on your understanding of the Scripture."

Note that you have yet to demonstrate the 'rapture' in your text? You certainly understand enough of my argument to blatantly duck questions that make you uncomfortable.

Eric wrote: "I don't speak on the Koran because it holds no relevance to me other than it proves also the unadulterated TRUTH of Biblical texts."

You literally don't know anything about it, yet you adamantly proclaim it is false. Curious.

Eric wrote: "For example, the God of the Bible never called christians His people."

Understandable, considering the Christ was the last prophet to receive revelation during the time period.

Eric wrote: "But you don't believe in Acts."

I don't believe the writings of Paul were from God at all, to be quite precise.

Eric wrote: "You have no foundation in the Word of God..."

Sure I do, or I wouldn't be Muslim. The Islamic pillar called BELIEF IN THE BOOKS is a requirement of my salvation.

Eric wrote: "therefore you must be instructed in the Word, not reasoned with."

lol This is double-speak masquerading as intelligence. smh

Eric wrote: "I know ACTS and the rest of the Books of the cannon, along with the Appocryphal writings are all the inspired Word of a God."

How are you so sure they were ALL "inspired by God?" Based on what? The One God of Abraham is not the Author of confusion, mind you.

Eric Cook - ...when you decide to believe on the Word of God in its entirety and with sincerity, the conversation can't go any further.

Point 1...You believe Paul is a false prophet. The Bible disagrees with your assessment, teachings, etc. Until you can reconcile that disbelief within yourself your faith is only lip service. The same as your lengthy responses.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "Eric didn't write"

lol I will say "Eric copy/pasted" when appropriate then. :)

Eric wrote: "Paul did under the inspiration of..."

Paul was only inspired by his own ambitions & lusts since he was clearly the false prophet you are looking for.

Eric wrote: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God..."

Just because it was pressed between those covers doesn't mean it came from God. Your powers of discernment have been compromised by Paul's pagan taint. Again, God is NOT the Author of confusion. His message is straight & plain and by no means would He command the believers to worship His prophet. Ever.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "when you decide to believe on the Word of God in its entirety..."

I certainly have. Unfortunately, what you hold cannot pretend to be this.

Eric wrote: "Point 1...You believe Paul is a false prophet."

No belief required since this is manifest in his blasphemous claims. There is no god but the One God and He has no partners nor children -- God is ONE.

Eric wrote: "The Bible disagrees with your assessment..."

Clearly it doesn’t since the bulk of it commands the believers to believe that God is ONE until Paul's pagan taint mysteriously pops up.

Eric Cook - ...the constant attempt to discredit Paul, actually discredits you. Peter, the apostle who walked with Jesus could not deny Paul. But again, you don't believe the fullness of the Scripture. Until you do, your understanding will always be incomplete.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "the constant attempt to discredit Paul..."

He discredited himself with his commitment to pagan taint.

Eric wrote: "actually discredits you."

There is no god but the One God, Supreme Creator of reality and Master of the Day of Judgment. God is ONE.

Eric wrote: "Peter, the apostle who walked with Jesus could not deny Paul."

Foolishness. All of the apostles of Jesus venomously rejected Paul's pagan taint.

Eric Cook - ...since you don't like Paul...I'll let Peter say it. Also when you write this...be sure to note... Eric Cook copy and pasted what Peter the Apostle of Christ, wrote under the INSPIRATION of the Spirit of the Almighty...about Paul;

2Pe 3:15 - And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

2Pe 3:16 - As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction

2Pe 3:17 - Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness

2Pe 3:18 - But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen

Muhammad Rasheed - Re: Second Epistle of Peter

“Most biblical scholars have concluded Peter is not the author, considering the epistle pseudepigraphical. Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support.

“The questions of authorship and date are closely related. For Petrine authorship to be authentic, it must have been written prior to Peter's death in c. AD 65–67. The letter refers to the Pauline epistles and so must post-date at least some of them, regardless of authorship, thus a date before 60 is improbable. Further, it goes as far to name the Pauline epistles as "scripture"—the only time a New Testament work refers to another New Testament work in this way—implying that it postdates them by some time. Scholars consider the epistle to be written anywhere between c. AD 60-130, with a favour for a date between 80-90 and so contend that it is pseudepigraphical.”

__________________________

SOURCES

1) Brown, Raymond E., Introduction to the New Testament, Anchor Bible, 1997

2) Erhman, Bart. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, 2005

3) Grant, Robert M. A Historical Introduction To The New Testament, 2010

4) Dale Martin (lecture). "24. Apocalyptic and Accommodation," 2009

5) Barton and Muddiman, Oxford Bible Commentary, 2007, pg. 1271

Muhammad Rasheed - Please note that the One God is not the Author of confusion.

Eric Cook - "God is not the author of confusion" is the first not of relevant Scripture you've dared to use, thus entire conversation. However, you sir...because of your European bible scholars...are definitely confused. Now Peter didn't write Peter, Paul is a heretic and Acts is a false book. 

All according to these "biblical scholars". And not until it's content completely discredits your previously stated positions. But...I'm the one confused??? Ok. Let's go with that.

Eric Cook - you need the Spirit of God...not commentary from the philosophies of men. But again, learning from confusion lends to your confusion. Your deficiency of understanding is clearer now, based on the sources you've decided to employ.

Muhammad Rasheed - You want me to believe that this book that was written completely by either Paul himself, or by pauline evangelicals decades, even centuries after Paul's death is the Word of God, when your own biblical scholars say otherwise.

What you hold is not what it pretends to be ACCORDING TO CHRISTIAN SCHOLARSHIP.

Eric Cook - You choose to believe what you want. I've just pointed out what is written. Believe Paul or don't. Believe Peter or don't. Believe what's been written or don't. All of these are decisions you have to make for yourself.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "you need the Spirit of God..."

I already have this, thank you.

Eric wrote: "not commentary from the philosophies of men."

The commentaries of your own biblical scholars only confirmed what the Lord thy God revealed about your pagan-tainted book. Don't attack me for it.

Eric wrote: "But again, learning from confusion lends to your confusion."

I hold no confusion. The final scripture in the canon that I hold is the literal Word of God that you only pretend to have, taken down directly from the messenger himself and free of taint by God's mercy.

Eric wrote: "Your deficiency of understanding is clearer now, based on the sources you've decided to employ."

lol Note that these are your own people -- who believe as you do -- that you are disparaging. If the learned among the Christians themselves are confused as to the legitimacy of their own book...

...well then. lol

Eric Cook - I don't lend myself to what you purport to be Christian scholarship. As I stated before...what you consider christianity is as false a doctrine as Islam itself has proven itself to be. Both come from the bosom of Roman Catholicism. But, I'm sure your Islamic scholars have taught you otherwise. Unfortunately, history records your Islamic scholars to be liars as well. But, that's a conversation for a different day/night.

Eric Cook - lol... please ammend your note...these commentators that YOU have presented DO NOT believe as I do. As a matter of fact, biblical text warns against these writings/philosophies of men that you his so dear...

Col 2:8 - Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "I don't lend myself to what you purport to be Christian scholarship."

How convenient. Meanwhile, its "linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support" all reveal it to be quite different from what you believe. This is fundamentally problematic.

Eric wrote: "As I stated before..."

You've stated quite a bit of falsehood before. You're quite good at it. lol

Eric wrote: "what you consider christianity is as false a doctrine..."

I consider "Christianity" to be two-fold which includes:

1) Those who profess to be followers of the message of the Christ Jesus, son of Mary (correct)

2) Those who profess to worship Jesus as a deity according to the pagan-tainted blasphemies of Paul (falsehood)

Eric wrote: "...as Islam itself has proven itself to be."

We've established in this very thread based on what you have typed alone that you don't know anything at all about Al-Islam. I know significantly more about your religion than you do about mine. I would be more careful if I were you as you're only setting yourself up for humiliation. I suggest you stick to what you actually know. lol

Eric wrote: "Both come from the bosom of Roman Catholicism."

I'm actually acquainted with a Christian who thoroughly debunked that nonsense in his own impressive scholarship:

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness: The Truth about the Vatican and the Birth of Islam by Gary Dale Cearley

I suggest you don't go around repeating that if it is indeed truth you claim to hold dear.

Eric wrote: "But, I'm sure your Islamic scholars have taught you otherwise."

lol My knowledge comes from the Word of God, thank you. I reject priest-craft.

Eric wrote: "Unfortunately, history records your Islamic scholars to be liars as well."

Some are, certainly (are they not but men?), but fortunately the Word of God itself is pure. I suggest you release Paul's tainted version of the message and come to the pure faith of the Lord thy God that ye may receive Mercy.

Eric wrote: "But, that's a conversation for a different day/night."

lol You are woefully unprepared for such a discussion.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "lol... please ammend your note..."

Negative.

Eric wrote: "these commentators that YOU have presented DO NOT believe as I do."

Sure they do. Do you not believe in the trinity, the divine sonship doctrine, etc., invented by Paul of Tarsus? Well, they, too, unfortunately believe the same. It's not their fault the objective scholarship about the physical texts reveals what it reveals in the literature. *shrug*

Eric wrote: "As a matter of fact, biblical text warns against these writings/philosophies of men that you his so dear..."

Trust me, I don't hold your stuff dear at all. I only believe in the portions that the One God confirm are still intact. The rest you may discard with my blessing.

Eric wrote: "Col 2:8"

You're quoting Paul again. You can stop.

Eric Cook - ...you keep using commentary of carnal men but in the same breath attempt to discredit Paul as an heretic by quoting heretics. As I stated, you have no foundation in the Scriptures. You err mightily using so-called "academics" who by their own admission are heretics and err in the word of God as mightily as you.

As Jesus stated in John...

Jhn 3:5 - Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

You err in simple precepts of the Word and count yourself as wise, while employing the precepts of foolish men.

Eric Cook - M. Rasheed wrote: “.my knowledge comes from the Word of God.”

But you have yet to prove any point you've stated by the Word of God. While simultaneously attempting to discredit every scripture given with words of men. If you can't see the clear error with this...you're lost within your own conceit.

Eric Cook - Btw...I do not believe in this "trinity". My GOD is ONE. Paul did not originate or create any doctrine based on divine sonship...both are catholic heresies...again, you continue to price your serv severe ignorance of the Scripture.

Please stop.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "you keep using commentary of carnal men..."

These are actual Christian believers who are biblical literature scholars... the exact same class of people who translate, proof, edit and publish your copy of the book. smdh

Eric wrote: "but in the same breath attempt to discredit Paul..."

Paul discredited himself by instructing the people to worship the very human messenger which blasphemes against the One God. I'm merely pointing out the manifest error within your doctrine.

Eric wrote: "as an heretic by quoting heretics."

Are they heretics merely by pointing out that what you hold cannot pretend to be what you believe it is? Obviously that just makes them objectively pure scholars in the field and nothing more, demonstrating an impressive display of integrity considering.

Eric wrote: "As I stated, you have no foundation in the Scriptures."

Sure, I do.

Eric wrote: "You err mightily using so-called 'academics' who by their own admission are heretics and err in the word of God as mightily as you."

Did I err merely by pointing out that the findings of your very own scholars fail to confirm your slipshod beliefs? This is not my fault that your house isn't in order. I suggest you repent.

Eric wrote: "As Jesus stated in John..."

"John" was written by pauline evangelicals and cannot claim to be written by the man whose name it bears. FYI.

Eric wrote: "You err in simple precepts of the Word and count yourself as wise, while employing the precepts of foolish men."

These "foolish men" are literal biblical scholars who are the literal guardians of your lore & doctrine. Are you SURE that's the hill you're prepared to die upon? O_O

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "But you have yet to prove any point you've stated by the Word of God."

You have yet to prove that the 'rapture' concept is legitimate even in your own book. Is there a time lock on those verses or what?

Eric wrote: "While simultaneously attempting to discredit every scripture given with words of men."

These are the same class of men who translated, proofed, edited and published your book. Why are you so picky now about their findings?

Eric wrote: "If you can't see the clear error with this...you're lost within your own conceit."

You're just in denial, that's all. The sensation you're experiencing is called "cognitive dissonance."

Eric Cook - These are not Christian believers.

Paul never discredited himself. YOU don't believe him. Instead you believe carnal men purporting to be christian but who are in fact ANTI-CHRIST according to scripture.

These are not my scholars, they are yours. You're quoting them, not me.

Now of course St. John is false now but you believe in Jesus as the last prophet of God, of whom the BOOK of John writes. Wow.

These foolish men are just that...fools.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "Btw...I do not believe in this 'trinity.'"

In this very thread you professed worship of both Jesus and the holy ghost called forth by name. Which one of the apostles denied belief when put on the spot again? Was that Peter? ;)

Eric wrote: "My GOD is ONE."

Sure. The whole "three-in-one" bamboozle. I heard it.

Eric wrote: "Paul did not originate or create any doctrine based on divine sonship..."

We know. He got it from Greco-Roman paganism, or perhaps from the Egyptians.

Eric wrote: "...both are catholic heresies..."

You're silly. Obviously the catholics built their paganism upon Paul's taint which pleased Constantine so.

Eric Cook - Again...Jesus is God. God is a Sprit. The Holy Ghost came in God's name. Jesus is the name of the Father, and the son and the Holy Ghost.

Your severe lack of understanding interprets that as three. This is clearly one. I am a son, father and business owner...but my NAME is Eric. I am ONE man that can occupy many POSITIONS. Understanding. Not interpretation.

No...Peter didn't deny the Holy Ghost...he denied knowing Jesus before Calvary.

Look...again, you are proving your ineptness of Bible. Unless you are willing to learn, why continue?

Eric Cook - ...the Silliness begins and with your severe ignorance of Scripture and ends with your arrogance in empty philosophy.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "These are not Christian believers."

Oh? How do you figure when they likewise believe that Jesus is the son of God who died on the cross for your sins and was resurrected, etc., etc.? Because they weren’t afraid to say what was revealed right in front of their faces? Shame on you.

Eric wrote: "Paul never discredited himself."

Sure he did. Did he not instruct the people to worship the final Hebrew messenger in the line of Isaac? Well, there ya go.

Eric wrote: "YOU don't believe him."

Correct. I fear the Wrath of Abraham's Lord too much and would not dare.

Eric wrote: "Instead you believe carnal men purporting to be christian but who are in fact ANTI-CHRIST according to scripture."

The scripture's criteria also reveal your Paul to be the false prophet of legend (see: Deut. 18), so it's curious how you delight in cherry-picking these things. And how are they "carnal" when they are your fellow Christian brethren who also confess with their moths that Jesus is their lord & savior? lol

Eric wrote: "These are not my scholars, they are yours. You're quoting them, not me."

If they were Muslims then I would claim them truly, but I could not quote Muslim scholars against your broken doctrine. It is far more effective to use your own people to point out the cracks lest you dismiss the revealtion out of hand through your uninformed, kneejerk anti-Islam bias.

Eric wrote: "Now of course St. John is false..."

lol I have no reason not to believe the figure himself wasn't real in history, just that the book bearing his name was authored by someone else entirely. In fact, by several someone else’s continuing the trend revealed in the confusing mysteries surrounding 2nd Peter's authorship. 

Eric wrote: "but you believe in Jesus as the last prophet of God, of whom the BOOK of John writes. Wow."

You're being silly again. The One God confirms that the Christ Jesus, son of Mary was indeed His messenger who spoke only Truth as revealed in the Book I hold. Lost indeed I would be if I had to rely upon your confused jumble.

Eric Cook - ....repeating the same incorrect points over and over, does not make them correct. Trump uses this tactic. The scholars you keep repeating uses that tactic. You're better than that. Try something different.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "Again...Jesus is God."

Again, there is no god but the One God and Jesus was His prophet-messenger and no more.

Eric wrote: "God is a Sprit."

God is the unseen Truth.

Eric wrote: "Your severe lack of understanding interprets that as three."

My severe rejection of blatant pagan-tainted falsehood proclaims that I don't care.

Eric wrote: "Unless you are willing to learn, why continue?"

I'm patiently waiting for you to prove the concept of 'rapture' is firmly found in your book. Anytime you're ready to post up.

Eric Cook - ...your knowledge of Scripture is severely ignorant. You soak out of ignorance. Therefore, you are operating out of that very ignorance.

When you can place SCRIPTURE in correct CONTEXT with any point you attempt to make then I'll help in your understanding of it. Otherwise, I recommend you actually READ the Bible. Your use of biblical context has been all but void during this "discussion".

Again you need to be taught. But, first you need to believe.

Muhammad Rasheed - Eric wrote: "Otherwise, I recommend you actually READ the Bible."

Already have, hence why I have zero memory of anything like the 'rapture.'

Be so kind as to point out the area where I missed it. There's a lad.

Eric wrote: "But, first you need to believe."

In Paul's version of Christianity? And buy myself a one-way ticket to hell? No thanks.

Eric Cook - M. Rasheed wrote: “Already have”

Clearly, you haven't.

Be so kind as to READ IT...that'll make you an even better lad. Now be a good little soldier and go actually pick up the Book. That's a good, youngster. Then maybe you'll actually reach the level of intelligence you obviously believe you've already attained, while simultaneously and continually displaying the opposite.

Now...Eric DID write that.

Muhammad Rasheed - lol By now it is pretty obvious that the 'rapture' isn't anywhere near the bible as I stated in the beginning... the entire concept was conjured by haughty European theologians. If you could have proven it you would have done so by now and posted it with a flourish -- instead here you sit in your humiliation.

Are you ready to yield the point?

Eric Cook - Unfortunately, we haven't gotten anywhere near the "rapture" context. What the word means and/or why its used. You were to busy showing off what you didn't know.

Which made it clear, there was no point in even going to that level of Scripture with you. A concept was created by Europeans, not the TRUTH of Scripture...bit a concept which you have produce to be very familiar in many of these false "concepts" of Scripture. I submit, if you strove to know scripture as much as you know European commentary, you'd have a much better comprehension of actual Scripture.

Muhammad Rasheed
- TRANSLATION: "The rapture isn't in the bible AT ALL."

I win.



Eric Cook - Translation...you know no Bible at all. This isn't a game. But feel free to continue playing.
 

________________________________
MEDIUM: Scanned pen & ink cartoon drawing w/Adobe Photoshop color.

SUBSCRIBE and receive a FREE! Weapon of the People eBook by M. Rasheed!

No comments:

Post a Comment