Originally posted by whodeywhodey: What is amazing is that the Dome of the Rock was built on the Holy Temple Mount in 688 AD, precisely 1290 years from the destruction of the captivity of the Israelites from Jerusalem in 583 BC. These 1290 days equal years, which came about in 688 AD.
Actually, the bit about the Abomination of Desolation comes from Daniel and not Revelation. In fact, nothing is really new in Revelation, rather, bits and pieces from Revelation can all be found in the prophetic Old Testament.
The belief that the Dome of the Rock is the Abomination of Desolation is nothing new. In fact, Jerry Landay in his book, The Dome ...[text shortened]... teaches that God has no Son, Islam is specifically antichrist in terms of Christian theology.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry at such idiocy. But at least check your math.
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyWikipedia says the Dome of the Rock was built between 685 and 691, when it was completed. It was under construction in 688, so there's nothing special about that date.
Actually, the bit about the Abomination of Desolation comes from Daniel and not Revelation. In fact, nothing is really new in Revelation, rather, bits and pieces from Revelation can all be found in the prophetic Old Testament.
The belief that the Dome of the Rock is the Abomination of Desolation is nothing new. In fact, Jerry Landay in his book, The Dome teaches that God has no Son, Islam is specifically antichrist in terms of Christian theology.
www.catholic.org says that Sophronius died from "grief" over the fall of Jerusalem, and not from being put into prison and forced labor. One other site also said he died from "grief." Wikipedia merely notes that he died.
Edit: No.1 is right, whodey, your math doesn't add up.
I was rereading some of my notes that apparently were a little off. I did some more investigating and found a site that presented it a little better.
It says that the First temple was destroyed in 586 BC. In addition, the Dome of the Rock was built during the 685-705 AD preiod.
The formula for this is converting OT years (360 day a year) into what we are on (solar years or 365.24 days) is this:
OT prophetic years of 1290 times 0.9857 = 1271 solar years.
Take 705 AD as the year for the completion of the Dome of the Rock and add 586 and you get 1291. That is exactly as Daniel said when you add the short time Jews visited the mount to make sacrifices after it was destroyed.
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyI think we did discuss this topic before and I told that what Jerry Landay wrote in his book can't be true because it simply contradict the basic faith of a Muslim rather than Khalif Omar. You say in your quote:
Actually, the bit about the Abomination of Desolation comes from Daniel and not Revelation. In fact, nothing is really new in Revelation, rather, bits and pieces from Revelation can all be found in the prophetic Old Testament.
The belief that the Dome of the Rock is the Abomination of Desolation is nothing new. In fact, Jerry Landay in his book, The Dome teaches that God has no Son, Islam is specifically antichrist in terms of Christian theology.
Omar declared that he was going to build a memorial to Muhammad on the original site of the temple of God.
Which can't be true for two reasons:
1- Building a Memorial for the prophet is against the teaching of the prophet himself. And Khalif omar was one of the closest companions to the prophet and can't by any way disobey an order from the prophet.
Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 56:
Volume 4, Book 56, Number 660:
Narrated 'Aisha and Ibn 'Abbas:
On his death-bed Allah's Apostle put a sheet over his-face and when he felt hot, he would remove it from his face. When in that state (of putting and removing the sheet) he said, "May Allah's Curse be on the Jews and the Christians for they build places of worship at the graves of their prophets." (By that) he intended to warn (the Muslim) from what they (i.e. Jews and Christians) had done.
2- Omar will never spend the money of Muslims for nothing that does not make sense and contradict the teachings of the prophets.
----
And as you base your theory about this quote I think you have to review your references and check you math as well , as my atheists fried show you.
-------
Thank No1 and rwingett, I don't think I can do a better Job 🙂
-------
EDIT:
You said
The Bible predicts the coming of Islam, the desecration of the temple mount, and the building of the memorial built by Abd el Malik ibn Marwan, a Gentile, in place of the Holy Temple
What do you mean by Gentile in this statement?
Originally posted by ahosyneyAll I can say is, I will have to buy the book and review his sources. Fair enough?
I think we did discuss this topic before and I told that what Jerry Landay wrote in his book can't be true because it simply contradict the basic faith of a Muslim rather than Khalif Omar. You say in your quote:
[b]Omar declared that he was going to build a memorial to Muhammad on the original site of the temple of God.
Which can't be true for two ...[text shortened]... /b], in place of the Holy Temple[/i]
What do you mean by Gentile in this statement?[/b]
Originally posted by rwingettThe first books of the NT were [b]written around 50-60 CE, but you don't have any manuscript fragments from until the 2nd century.[/b]
The first books of the NT were [b]written around 50-60 CE, but you don't have any manuscript fragments from until the 2nd century. You don't have a complete copy of the bible from until the 4th century (the Codex Sinaiticus, or the Codex Vitacinus). The earliest NT fragment that we have in our possession is the "Rylands Library Papyrus P52", dated to ar ...[text shortened]... ://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Vaticanus[/b]
I realize it is controversial, but the so-called "Magdalene Papyrus" was recently dated using a scanning laser microscope. Earlier accounts placed the fragments somewhere in the 2nd century, but modern technology has posed a serious challenge to that assertion, placing them at roughly 66 A.D.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Barcelona Papyrus, and the Paris Papyrus, have all been dated to roughly 70 A.D. as well.
Originally posted by chappy1Who is greater? An interesting question. Has anyone considered that maybe God reveled himself to the gentiles through Jesus, and God reveled himself to the Arab tribes through Muhammad? Perhaps one was not designed to be "greater" than the other. 😏
Who is greater Jesus or Muhammad? Let's analyze this shall we?
Did Jesus have an earthly father?
Bible:
His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. Matthew 1:18
"How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?" The angel answered, "The Holy Sp ...[text shortened]... ther except through me"- Jesus
John 14:6
Merry Christmas!
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by bill718Rec'd
Who is greater? An interesting question. Has anyone considered that maybe God reveled himself to the gentiles through Jesus, and God reveled himself to the Arab tribes through Muhammad? Perhaps one was not designed to be "greater" than the other. 😏
Originally posted by epiphinehasYour source for these claims seems to be the very controversial work of Carsten Peter Thiede and Jose O'Callaghan. Their very early dating of the Magdalen Papyrus is viewed with extreme skepticism, while their identification of the 7Q5 fragment (Dead Sea Scrolls) as being from the gospel of Mark is now almost universally rejected.
[b]The first books of the NT were [b]written around 50-60 CE, but you don't have any manuscript fragments from until the 2nd century.[/b]
I realize it is controversial, but the so-called "Magdalene Papyrus" was recently dated using a scanning laser microscope. Earlier accounts placed the fragments somewhere in the 2nd century, but modern technolo ...[text shortened]... he Barcelona Papyrus, and the Paris Papyrus, have all been dated to roughly 70 A.D. as well.[/b]
It should be noted that Thiede was a Knight of Justice in the Order of Saint John, while O'Callaghan was a Roman Catholic Priest. Their motivation for producing very early dates and questionable identification for various manuscript fragments is obvious. Their objectivity is suspect. And their findings are rejected by a majority of biblical scholars.
Originally posted by bill718An interesting twist you've suggested. However if that was the case then why do the Bible and the Qur'an state that Jesus was born of a virgin? Why do the Bible and the Qur'an state that Jesus was sinless? Why do the Bible and Qur'an state that Jesus ascended to heaven? If they were both equal in stature and purpose then why does Jesus have all of these miraculous things associated with him while Muhammad has none of them? Furthermore, they both could not have been equal in message because their messages were NOT the same!
Who is greater? An interesting question. Has anyone considered that maybe God reveled himself to the gentiles through Jesus, and God reveled himself to the Arab tribes through Muhammad? Perhaps one was not designed to be "greater" than the other. 😏
Originally posted by chappy1Furthermore, they both could not have been equal in message because their messages were NOT the same!
An interesting twist you've suggested. However if that was the case then why do the Bible and the Qur'an state that Jesus was born of a virgin? Why do the Bible and the Qur'an state that Jesus was sinless? Why do the Bible and Qur'an state that Jesus ascended to heaven? If they were both equal in stature and purpose then why does Jesus have all of these m ...[text shortened]... re, they both could not have been equal in message because their messages were NOT the same!
Can you state both messages so that we can see the difference?
Originally posted by ahosyneyJesus's message: Put your faith in God and his son (himself) for forgiveness and repent and be saved. Love your neighbor as yourself.
[b]Furthermore, they both could not have been equal in message because their messages were NOT the same!
Can you state both messages so that we can see the difference?[/b]
Muhammad's message: Reject Judiaism and Christianity and accept Islam. Slay the infidel.
1 edit
Originally posted by chappy1Both are wrong, go read again!
Jesus's message: Put your faith in God and his son (himself) for forgiveness and repent and be saved. Love your neighbor as yourself.
Muhammad's message: Reject Judiaism and Christianity and accept Islam. Slay the infidel.
EDIT: This video may help you
&feature=PlayList&p=2AE5A494566A541E&index=13
Originally posted by chappy1Elijah ascended to Heaven without having to physically die. Does that make him greater than Jesus in your view?
An interesting twist you've suggested. However if that was the case then why do the Bible and the Qur'an state that Jesus was born of a virgin? Why do the Bible and the Qur'an state that Jesus was sinless? Why do the Bible and Qur'an state that Jesus ascended to heaven? If they were both equal in stature and purpose then why does Jesus have all of these m ...[text shortened]... re, they both could not have been equal in message because their messages were NOT the same!