However, the Hebrew word khemdah is a collective singular, meaning the idea expressed is plural. The better translation is “desired” or “what is desired.” Haggai 2:8 provides the parallel that identifies these desired objects: “‘The silver is mine and the gold is mine,’ declares the LORD Almighty.” The desired objects are most likely earthly treasures, not the coming Messiah.
Other translations render the Hebrew word as “the wealth” (NASB, CEB), “the precious things” (ASV), “the treasure” (NRSV), and “the treasures” (ESV, CEV). The idea is that the riches of all nations will be brought to the temple in Jerusalem.
Haggai 2:9 says, “The latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former.” The former glory refers to that of Solomon’s temple, which was an opulent structure. Haggai predicts a temple that will be even more glorious than Solomon’s: the latter glory would be greater due to the wealth of the nations pouring in.
When will this happen? The beginning of verse 7 helps identify this future occasion. The Lord says it will happen when He “shakes all nations”; that is, after a time of judgment on the world. God has shaken nations in the past (Psalm 99:1; Isaiah 64:2; Habakkuk 3:6), and He will do so again when Jesus Christ returns to the earth (Joel 3:16; Matthew 24:30).
Hebrews 12:26 cites Haggai 2:7, followed by an explanation that, after this “shaking,” believers will receive a kingdom that cannot be shaken. This is a clear reference to the future millennial kingdom that Jesus will establish when He returns at the end of seven years of tribulation. Therefore, this portion of Haggai’s prediction is yet unfulfilled.
Some interpreters suggest that the text may concern both the Messiah and earthly riches. In the end, what is desired of the nations will come: a Savior, the Messiah, and tribute will be paid to Him during His millennial reign.
Read more:
http://www.gotquestions.org/desired-...#ixzz3A7OKjOsu
Quote
This is also described by Godfrey Higgins in his book :
this book is nothing more than the opinions of Godfrey Higgins.. Which he is entitled to, doesn't of course mean his opinion is any more likely to be correct than the next persons. One mans scholar is another mans charlatan. One has to look to ones own conscience which opinion seems truth.
Quote
Second:
You claim jesus is god your lord part of trinity right??? so why argue???
Who's arguing? I know exactly what God means to me.. The Lord God is ONE and Jesus is His Word.
Quote
Third:As for the paraclete if you claim it is the holy spirit then you are wrong for two reasons : 1. the original text did not state holy rather the spirit which could be applied to a prophet , a man
if it meant man it would say man.. The word is "spirit"... We know God is Spirit.. And we know God is Holy. It's not such a massive leap in understanding that the spirit Jesus the Son referred to was the Holy Spirit. Could... Just does not cut it.
Quote
2. the holy spirit was already with them then how will he send the holy spirit if is already there:
Quote
"
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost."(John 20:21-22)
the Holy Spirit is shown to be present on many occasions throughout scripture. It's already been explained that when the world had the word (Jesus) then what need of the Spirit? The Spirit brings understanding in the absence of the Word. That's why Jesus said when He was gone from the world the Spirit would come in His name to bring to the disciples remembrance all of what Jesus had said. How could the "comforter" be Mohammed? Mohammed never knew Jesus or heard His teachings.
Quote
3. there is another passage which says another comforter !!!! the holy spirit is only one so this can only reffer to a prophet :
Quote
John 14:16"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever"
Why so? This cannot apply to Mohammed.. He never knew the disciples and he certainly did not abide with them forever. Mohammed died and had a tomb! You think that if Jesus made such a promise to His disciples.. He would wait for 600 years before sending the comforter.. Long after the disciples had died thus, leaving them without the promised guidance.
Quote
4. The holy spirit do not speak or testify :
Quote
john 15:26"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me"
my goodness... Do you believe that God can only bring understanding through human speech!!!! Again.. This cannot refer to Mohammed.. Mohammed did not testify of Jesus, Mohammed never knew Jesus or His teachings. Besides from the fact Mohammed never "proceedeth from the father" God... The Bible teaches that the Spirit proceeds from the father.. God.
Quote
An important notion also is that the greek word parakletos does not actually mean the comforter rather comforter is paracalon , the actual text says parakleytos . The actual meaning of the word the comforter in hebrew is mnahem
The word Mnahmana is Aramaic not Hebrew. There is no and never was any Aramaic Scriptures that reads Ahmad in the verses in question. Mnahmana is not the Aramaic/Syriac rendering for the name Mohammed or Ahmad. Mnahmana is an Aramaic term that means Comforter, and was assigned to the Holy Spirit by Jesus. Moh or Ahmad has the root word for praise, which is a different word from Mnahmana.
Quote
Another important prophecy is what jesus peace be upon him in john stated :
19 And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou?
20 And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ.
21 And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No.
John 1: 19-21
This clearly escribes that they were waiting for a prophet coming which jesus peace be upon hm denied to be
lets read a little more...
And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who are you?’ He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, ‘I am not the Christ.’ And they asked him, ‘What then? Are you Elijah?’ He said, ‘I am not.’ ‘Are you the Prophet?’ And he answered, ‘No.’ So they said to him, ‘Who are you? We need to give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?’ He said, ‘I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, "Make straight the way of the Lord," as the prophet Isaiah said.’ (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees.) They asked him, ‘Then why are you baptizing, if you are neither the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?’" John 1:19-25
This is not the testimony of Jesus..and Jesus is not denying anything here.. It is the testimony of John the Baptist. You are basing your understanding that the Jews were expecting three figures to come, and that Christ and the Prophet were two distinct individuals. If you think on this... if the Jews were correct then Mohammed couldn’t be that Prophet like Moses. For the simple reason... if the Prophet was to be an Ishmaelite, or a non-Israelite, then why would these Jews ask a fellow Israelite, John, if he were that Prophet to come? Why did they ask John, whom they knew as an Israelite, if he were that Prophet if the Prophet was to be a non-Israelite...a Gentile.. Or an Arab....?
Quote
Fourth : If you are going to ignore my responses about your so called crusiFICTION then you are just running away , if you seriously think I have proved nothing then have the courage to respond or else if you don't have an answer then stop making such funny claims LOL you claim I did not prove anything YET you CAN'T answer
you have not proved to my satisfaction.. And surely as it is you who are throwing around these claims about Gods scriptures then it is up to you to prove to my satisfaction what you claim. I am sure your fellow muslims would be applauding your efforts and would be in agreement with you to a man. I don't see I have to justify my scriptures to you.. As you have already said you don't believe them. You certainly don't respect them on that basis I'm sure you do not see the Bible as Gods Holy work in the same way I do.. I see the onus is upon yourself. I can only explain how I as a Christian see my scriptures. It doesn't bother me any if you pay heed or not. Your eternal destination is in your own hands.
Quote
Yes they were men with faith which is why they were sinless since they were role models for humanity, how could god choose sinful persons to be role models !!!! sometimes extreme sins such as adultery , incest and drinking wine!!!
its not our place to say who God chooses and why.. God chooses men and women whom best suit His purpose for the task in hand. There is no such thing as a sinless being with the one exception of Jesus.
Quote
Fifth : If god in your understanding is really one then why do you still believe in trinity???
because my friend the trinity is how we best understand the nature of God.. As revealed through His Word Jesus. I know you can't help but understand the trinity as three separate gods.. Which is NOT what it is. I would like to hear how you would attempt to explain the doctrine of tawheed .. Oneness of Allah.... And I don't mean trot out the usual claims... But what you yourself understand the nature of God based upon this doctrine you have. Absolute oneness does not work on many levels.
Quote
Sixth: Because the corruption of the gospels shows that it is NOT the word of god rather word of manipulators!!! So how could you still believe in such if you know for some reason that your holy book has been manipulated !!!
the alleged corruption of the Gospels has not been proven in any way that changes it's core message. I believe in the Bible as truth, because I have absolute faith in God to protect His revelations from corruption.
Quote
Seventh: What grand scheme , you are claiming two contradicting things: monotheism and trinity????
the grand scheme of life... Of which we are all players. This is only a contradiction in your mind .. Not mine. The trinity... Whatever you think to the contrary gives a perfect example of Gods perfect oneness based on love.
Eight : As for what you said about Paul well he is the same one who said this:
“Christ has ransomed us from the curse of the Law in as much as He became a curse for us” (Galatians 3:13)
He claims jesus bacame cursed
Peace
Originally Posted by محمد سني 1989
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks