Ahhh...angels!
I saw an angel once in a dream when he came to speak to me about a certain thing.
It was marvellous.
Angels in dreams are not uncommon and they are mentioned in the Bible as coming in that manner.
Sometimes they come in a clearer manner than dreams. People actually see them outside of dreams. The Apostle Paul? says they come to peoples doors and you dont know they are an angel.
Ive also seen the "other side" which might freak a few people.
It did to me, when it first happened.
It was just before I become a born again christian and I was in bed one night and suddenly my mind openned up and I saw this black slug-like life form, with brilliant shining eyes, come in through the sleepout door as if the door wasnt there.
I lost sight of the being for a few minutes and then suddenly it was on top of me pushing me down and smothering me into the bed. Three times I had to fight the thing off before it departed.
It had been trying to kill me.
Not long afterwards I became a born again christian.
Maybe the thing knew I was going to get saved by The Lord (they know a lot about whats going on before men know it happens).
This wasnt the only time I experienced this activity.
About another four times over the next year or two it occured. I figured they were trying to scare me off Jesus... but he gave His Grace and I persevered with Him:).
Ive also been bitten by the odd one and had one crawl up my chest one night and go "boo" and wake me up. Little rat of a thing.
So they are there...even if we dont believe in them. Satans greatest trick is to convince world society he isnt there. Good old Western intellectual dont believe in evil spirits much but us christian folks do.
So do the poor people in Third World countries where the demon powers dominate village life at night.

more on evil spirits...
Another confirmation of demons (fallen angles) is the number of people with "voices" in their heads.
Psychiatric institutions are full of these poor folks.
Yet the psychiatrists have no answer other than bombing the victim out on medication... and gross events like electro-therapy treatment (dont ever let your child go through that if he or she is sick...its paganism!).
One classic example is the Son of Sam killer in America who got his orders to kill from his neighbours dog, which he says spoke to him. THAT WAS NO dog speaking to him.
He had an open door in his life which gave satan access to his mind. That open door, for you young lustful guys, can frequently be masturbation (with that rotten pornography).
Not in every case will it occur, but it can bring a "voice" that torments.
Masturbation certainly needs to be turned from.
Surely theres better things in life that abusing your body. Its a doorway to demons.
Everything in the spirit world is about authorities... thats why we see family curses coming down family lines.
Someone openned a "door" back down the line and the curse (the demon power) travelled into the next generations to torment those family members. That needs to be broken through confession of sin and repentence. The best place? An on-fire christian church where The Holy Spirit moves in Gifts of tongues, healings, prophecy, micracles and deliverances. Where they "lay on hands" to delivery is the place to go.
Son of Sam I believe later became a born agian christian and received Gods forgiveness for his sin.
*Not all voices are from God. In fact its mostly uncommon He speaks. In my police years I saw photos of a guy who jumped off the 40th floor of the Australian Square building in Sydney. He told the cab driver who drove him to Australia Square that God had told him to jump. The cabbie couldnt stop him from doing it...and tragically he followed the demon speaking to him... to his death.

GrahamY,

My understanding is that Muslims regard an angel as a messenger from God; not as a white creature with wings. In Muslim theology people do not become angels when they die.

K.TRAD,

You still fail to offer any credible evidence that an angel transmitted the koran to Muhammad. The unsupported word of the Muhammad's followers is not sufficient evidence for such an extraordinary claim.

Note that the evidence for the claim that Jesus rose from the dead is the same as the evidence you provide for the angel and the koran – ie it relies on the unsupported word of believers. So why should I believe the angel story and not the resurrection?

K.TRAD,

You have also failed to explain why Keith Moore's astounding discovery, a discovery that, were it true, would make him MORE FAMOUS THAN EINSTEIN, has never appeared in a QUALITY PEER-REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC JOURNAL.

Paul.L,

Re interview with Dourehi

For the record I think the invasion of Iraq was an act of insanity and I do not want to minimise the blame attached to the West for the deaths there. However, as a matter of plain fact, most violent deaths in Iraq seem to be due to various MUSLIM factions killing each other.

No Western power is forcing Muslims to kill each other in Iraq.

I note Dourehi's repetition of the constant Muslim refrain that the West has despatched armies to occupy parts of Dar-ul-Islam rather than Muslims invading the West. This is an empty argument. No Muslim country has the capacity to invade a Western country. They could not do it even if they wanted to.

On the other hand, when Muslims are able to get hold of their enemies, usually other Muslims, they have not hesitated to kill on a large scale in the most brutal manner imaginable. Darfur as well as Iraq comes to mind.

This constant whinge that only "the West" is brutal and us poor Muslims are the perpetual victims is getting rather irritating.

Sound the REVEILLI... .. WAKE UP.. ok.. sorry about this, but Keysar introduces a very good point about 'Interpretation'....

I am not surprised you brought that passage..I mentioned it long ago and pre-empted it.

WHO are those 'scholars'?

1/ They are not Christian Scholars.

2/ They (Pharisees/Rabbi's) tried to establish a rule for every bit of human behavior which was not specifically mentioned in the Torah much like Islam does.

This included the age at which a female can have intercourse which was not literally spelt out in any place in the Old Testament.

"Keep them for yourselves".. agreed.. now.. under what law did captive slaves come? Aah..the law of Moses, which prescribed (in the primary source) that if you are attracted to a WOMEN among the captives (not a child) you may MARRY her. Deut 21:11

So, this boils down to the following:

a) How much does the 'rabbinic' opinion reflect what is IN the text?
b) How much of the understanding was based not on the text, but a desire to 'have a rule for everything'?

In Jesus day, the Pharisees had so many 'rules' they even included one that forbade you eating an EGG which had been laid on the Sabbath.

I know of no Christian who would recognize any such opinion as in any way reflective of the true heart of God in the Old Testament.

You could argue that the "Rabbi's" would be the best people to consult about the meaning of a Jewish text? Indeed...IF they just sought the 'meaning' of the text, rather than "filling in the blanks" which in this case...they did.

In the Islamic case, we have:

1/ The plain meaning of the text (65:4)
2/ The secondary source (accepted by Muslims today) supporting that plain meaning.
3/ The explanation of highly regarded Scholars, agreeing with the plain sense of the text and the secondary source.

It's not quite the same thing mate.

GZ,

1) what you call a strawman has nothing to do with distinguishing (A) from (B). it is a separate issue of my understanding of (B).

2) should i have simply stated (A) and (B) earlier? i think my posts were in fact very clear. my first post queried your selective (A). (i.e. my (1) and (i)). you dismissed it my question, and i repeated it. by your reply, it seemed clear you were actually interested in (B), to which i responded then why not argue (B) (my (3)).

3) this wasn't hard, but you largely treated my early posts with contempt. perhaps this was because of my "condescending tone". i would suggest that by the standards of this thread, and by your own standards, i was very polite.

4) your reference to "freedom of speech" is a red herring. i'm not in the remotest sense arguing that you be censored.

5) to reiterate my "doubts":

a) why argue (A) selectively, when it applies to many other religions?

b) how does (A) imply (B)?

i don't think what follows (my "muddied" waters) has any large bearing on those questions.

6) i agree that (B) does not necessarily constitute a general attack on muslims, but it could be interpreted that way. my comments on this were qualified, because i honestly wasn't sure what you intended. again, your general comments on muslims have been derogatory: it's not rhetorical cleverness on my part to include muslims in a discussion of (B).

7) my confusion is, if (B) is not intended as an attack on muslims, then i'm not sure what (B) means. i know that things can be a threat, and people can be a threat, but how can ideas be a threat, except as implemented by people. so, does your version of (B) cascade into a general attack of muslims?

8) i also referred to my muslim friends as potential evidence against (B). if "islam" is a threat then why is that threat not manifested in my muslim friends? what has to be added to (B) to make the threat real?

Dear Steven...

you stated:

<<the evidence for the claim that Jesus rose from the dead is the same as the evidence you provide for the angel and the koran – ie it relies on the unsupported word of believers.>>

As I've said before, we cannot 'prove' the resurrection, but we can provide a 'compelling' case for it. Though, the testimony of the various eye witnesses is, in my view more than compelling.
PAUL is the ultimate 'clincher'. His life, by his own confession, and corroborated by other sources, and witnesses, such as Dr Luke, was one of extreme genocide against Christians.
His encounter with the risen Christ turned him 180deg and he embraced Christ as Lord and Savior.
His writings are more profound than one could even imagine.. so deep it defies contemplation,.. but to speak thus might be said to be 'subjective'... agreed.

The objective testimony does however remain, that he once persecuted the Church, and after encountering the risen Christ..he proclaimed Him and the Gospel to the world.

Please don't feel I'm 'preaching' at you.. I'd rather think of it as recounting some history.

The great part about Christianity, is that it's about a 'relationship'..not 'rules'.. if you confess Christ as your Lord.. we rejoice.. if you then depart from His grace.. we grieve, and pray, but no one will try to murder you as could happen under an Islamic Caliphate. In that sense..I absolutely declare from the housetops, without the slightest hint of apology. "our religion..is better than theirs".

Paul said "Greeks seek wisdom, and Jews seek signs" how true this is :)
but his response?

"but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."

and I cannot add anything to that :)

I can only urge, encourage and exhort you (Keysar, and all).."If you hear Him knocking...please open the door