Lady Fatima, that was an interesting site you gave me. It sounds very convincing the way they twist scripture around to support Islam. But I can just point to one verse in the Bible that can wipe away all the hard work of those poor Muslims on Isaiah 53 in that site:
Hosea 6:2................He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him.
This part of scripture CLEARLY prophecies the resurrection of Christ. You cannot have a resurrection unless there is a death first. Also, when I checked out the site, they had commentary on certain verses which implied Jesus' death and said the verse does not mean Jesus was to die. O.K., fair enough, but why did they ignore Isaiah 53:10? They had no commentary on that whatsoever. Isaiah 53:10 said: But the LORD was pleased To crush Him, putting {Him} to grief; If He would render Himself {as} a guilt offering, He will see {His} offspring, He will prolong {His} days, And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
Notice that I put the emphasis on "The Lord was pleased to Crush Him." This takes away the Muslim claim that God would not allow Jesus to die. The way I see it is, you change certain parts of scripture to support your claim, but you do not realize that you have to change ALL of scripture to accomplish that feat.
Now, let's get to the issue of original sin. Shall we dance ma Lady?!
There is one verse in the Bible that can refute your entire post on original sin. But I want this dance to last a while.
Lady Fatima wrote:The Old Testament says: "God created man in his own image" (Genesis 1:27). One would expect God's image not to be born with sin.
This is completely illogical. "In His own image" does not mean humans and God are EXACTLY alike. Can God be born in the first place? God is eternal, we are not. If God's own image cannot be born with sin, then why can it be born with infirmities? Sickness and death are a result of the sin of man, for when Adam and Eve sinned, God said, "cursed is the ground for thy sake." (Genesis 3:17).
Lady Fatima wrote:The Old Testament also says: "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son:" (Ezekiel 18:20).
This does not mean man is not sinful by nature. This is talking in terms of judgement. God will not judge you on your father's sins and vice versa. God will not punish you for your father's sins and vice versa.
When (not if) you sin, you will be responsible for your actions.
Lady Fatima wrote:The New Testament says: "As he (Jesus) passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, 'Rabbi,, who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?' Jesus answered, 'It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.' “(John 9:1-3).
The man was not blind specifically because of the sin of his parents or by his own sin. That was the question Jesus answered. But in essence, he was blind because of sin in general. As God already said to Adam and Eve, "Cursed is the ground for thy sake." And when Jesus said, "that the works of God shall be manifested in him," He is obviously talking about healing the blind man, which only God can do.
Lady Fatima wrote:This means sin can not be transmitted. If sin can not be inherited, how the "original sin" comes to us? Does the original sin stay in the physical body or in the soul? We get our physical body from our parents who can not transmit sin. We get our soul from God and a just God can not put sin in the soul of an innocent new born.
Humans are sinful by nature because that comes with free will, and also we (by nature) have no desire to seek after the things of God. Why do you think Jesus had to be born of a virgin? Jesus was the ONLY human being to not sin, and the virgin birth CLEARLY shows that man is sinful BY NATURE. Are you going to tell me that the virgin birth was an exercise in futility by God? Why else would Jesus be born of a virgin? What is the reason Muslims have for the virgin birth of Jesus?
Lady Fatima wrote:The Holy Bible also says: " the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him:" (Ezekiel 18:20). "And every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour." (I Corinthians 3:8 )
Therefore, as a just God, He cannot punish 'A' for the crime of 'B'. God can not shed the innocent blood of Jesus (P*) to redeem the sinners. Concept of redemption is against the teaching of the Holy Bible.
As a human, I am responsible for my own sins. When my mom or my father sins, I am not going to be punished by God for their sins. But does that mean I myself do not sin? You have to realize that I am going to sin no matter how hard I try not to. If sinning is not a part of human nature, then why don't you make an oath starting from today and say, "for now on I will be sinless the rest of my life." The moment you sin after you make that oath, come back on this forum and explain to me again why "original sin" is not true. When in doubt, prove something to be untrue by testing it yourself. For Jesus said, "He who sins is a slave to sin." (John 8:34).
Lady Fatima wrote:There is no mention of "original sin" anywhere in The Old T.
In Psalms 51:5, King David himself says:
Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Lady Fatima wrote:Jesus (P*) did not teach 'original sin'.
Read John 8:34 again.
Lady Fatima wrote:None of the Prophets ever said that sin can only be redeemed by the shedding of sinless blood of the “son” of God.
Read the book of the prophet Isaiah again.
Lady Fatima wrote:All these doctrines were conceived, developed, nurtured, and then established by Saint Paul and his followers over a period of three hundred years, after Jesus (P*) had left this earth.
I guess the
Almighty God allowed these people to tamper with His Word, then hundreds of years later with Muhammed, He finally decides to tell man the truth, FOR THE FIRST TIME!!!!!