I have repeatedly asked you, through one post after another, to substantiate and justify ANYTHING you are claiming, and yet I receive nothing post after post. I have repeatedly, through my posts, given you case facts and the evidence behind them, all of which go unchallenged. I have showed you over and over and given you the evidence that the things you are saying are not true. You seem to have no case of your own, no evidence to support your claims, and no rebuttal to anything I've said. And I request over and over that you explain to what you are referring, and generally no reply with any clarification. I say this to say the conversation is getting frustrating.

And then you say, "Your only proof is a word you like, but God decreed the opposite." What does this even mean? You and I have exchanged 13 posts, and you say my "only proof is a word [I] like"????? It's an outrageous assertion, and not in the least bit true.

> but since Gabriel who taught these notes in Gospels to Jesus

The idea that Gabriel is the Holy Spirit is neither a biblical teaching (the Injil) nor a Qur'anic one.

> https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v01-n03/the-talmud-and-the-gospels/

Interesting. This link says that Jesus was not quoting Midrash, since the Talmud wasn't written until several centuries later. This link claims that the Talmud was plagiarizing Jesus, exactly the opposite of the case you assumed you were making.

> https://stjudasmaccabaeus.wordpress.com/2011/09/24/the-judeo-christian-comparing-the-talmud-and-the-gospels/

This post asserts that "Joshua (Jesus in Greek),... studied with the best student Pharisees of His day." These is absolutely no evidence to substantiate this claim. None at all.

> http://legacy.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Instone-Brewer/prepub/07_Instone_Brewer.pdf

The Talmud's rendition of Jesus's trial came centuries after the event.

Whatever point(s) you think you are making here, they are similar to your other posts in that there is no evidence to support any of your theses. You have yet, in 13 posts, to make your case.

> lands which converted to Islam stayed Muslim until now because they have seen what is Islam from first generation. Later generations couldn't manage themselves properly and lost the touch with God's message, hence spread of Islam had stopped.

What does this have to do with anything we've been talking about? Our subject matter has been Zoroastrianism (a millennium before Mohammed), Christianity (600 years before Mohammed), the Jewish concept of Messiah (700-1000 years before Mohammed), the Torah and Midrash (400 years before Mohammed), and now you're talking about the territorial land grab made by Islamic armies and the slaughter of many tens of thousands of people? The lands stayed Muslim because the Muslims killed the Kafir.

> Later generations couldn't manage themselves properly and lost the touch with God's message, hence spread of Islam had stopped.

What does this even mean? Christians still have the holy Scriptures (the Tawrat, the Zabur, the Injil, and the rest of the Bible). The spread of Islam continues to this day.

Your only proof is a word you like, but God decreed the opposite.

For a human to never written down oral Talmud collections more than 20 years in that era would be necessary, but since Gabriel who taught these notes in Gospels to Jesus, knew these verses in advance and he supported him, Gabriel the holy spirit.

https://jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v01-n03/the-talmud-and-the-gospels/

for a different collection:

https://stjudasmaccabaeus.wordpress.com/2011/09/24/the-judeo-christian-comparing-the-talmud-and-the-gospels/

from a stricter source:

http://legacy.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Instone-Brewer/prepub/07_Instone_Brewer.pdf

Historic details are open for all, lands which converted to Islam stayed Muslim until now because they have seen what is Islam from first generation. Later generations couldn't manage themselves properly and lost the touch with God's message, hence spread of Islam had stopped.

Please post freely.

> Jesus used them.

Where? Reference, please.

> Then come up with another scripture. You are bound with God's revelation and there is no escape from Him.

I don't know what you mean. There is no other Scripture. God has revealed Himself in the Old and New Testaments, and those (and only those) are the authoritative writings. I am bound to them, and they are what I obey.

> Jews have saved these Midrash notes for themselves when Christian scholars discovered Gospel and started studiying the Torah Midrash hence Talmud became part of religious teaching througout (at least in larger circles then before) in Roman Empire.

You are tying things together that history does not tie, and you are saying more things that are untrue. The Jews saved Midrash notes, yes. But Christians didn't "Discover" the Gospel. They were eyewitnesses and wrote the Gospel. The Christians didn't start studying the Torah after they wrote the Gospels, they were raised to follow the Torah. The Talmud did become part of the religious teaching throughout the Roman Empire, but that has nothing to do with the Gospels.

> Midrash existed before they were written, putting them on paper doesn't change they weren't from God or Jesus used them.

You are tying things together that history doesn't tie. Yes, midrash existed before they were written, but they were always regarded (even by the Jews) as human commentary, not the word of the Lord or revelation from God.

And if you are claiming that Jesus used them, please give me a reference to give evidence of what you are saying.

> Please share freely what has been found about Quran, God's latest revelation, 150 years after late Prophet's death.

From an article (just to say it is not my work):

The earliest written Christian knowledge of Muhammad stems from Byzantine sources, written shortly after Muhammad's death in 632. In the anti-Jewish polemic "The Teaching of Jacob," a dialogue between a recent Christian convert and several Jews, one participant writes that his brother "wrote to [him] saying that a deceiving prophet has appeared amidst the Saracens". Another participant in the Doctrina replies about Muhammad: "He is deceiving. For do prophets come with sword and chariot?, …[Y]ou will discover nothing true from the said prophet except human bloodshed". The author seems to know of Mohammad's existence and represents both Jews and Christians as viewing him in a negative light.

Knowledge of Muhammad was available in Christendom from after the early expansion of Islam and, later, the translation of a polemical work by John of Damascus, who used the phrase "false prophet" in "Heresies in Epitome: How They Began and Whence They Drew Their Origin.". According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, Christian knowledge of Muhammad's life "was nearly always used abusively". Another influential source was the Epistolae Saraceni or the “Letters of a Saracen” written by an Oriental Christian and translated into Latin from Arabic. From the 9th century onwards, highly negative biographies of Muhammad were written in Latin, such as the one by Álvaro of Córdoba proclaiming him the Antichrist. Christendom also gained some knowledge of Muhammad through the Mozarabs of Spain, such as the 9th-century Eulogius of Córdoba, who was one of the Martyrs of Córdoba.

Nicetas of Byzantium wrote: In short, Muhammad was an ignorant charlatan who succeeded by imposture in seducing the ignorant barbarian Arabs into accepting a gross, blaspheming, idolatrous, demoniac religion, which is full of futile errors, intellectual enormities, doctrinal errors and moral aberrations.

Summary: Muhammad was regarded as a deceiving prophet, a violent, blasphemous charlatan, and possibly even an anti-Christ.

That's just a brief survey of some writings.

Regarding the Qur'an, early critics questioned both its morality and authenticity. The most common criticisms concern various pre-existing sources upon which the Qur'an relies, internal inconsistency, and its immoral teachings. In 746 John of Damascus (sometimes St. John of Damascus, who spent his career as secretary to the Caliph in Damascus) wrote the "Fount of Knowledge" (part 2) of which is entitled "Heresies in Epitome: How They Began and Whence They Drew Their Origin." In this work John makes extensive reference to the Quran and, in his opinion, its failure to live up to even the most basic scrutiny. He said:

* The Qur'an is less than it claimed to be, since it contains material that could hardly be worthy of divine revelation.
* Muhammad was not who he claimed to be because the Qur'an provided insufficient evidence to support his prophetic role.
* When read properly, certain statements in the Qur'an support and affirm Christian beliefs.

> What is placed in Talmud brought the second expulsion of Israelites from their land

This is not true. The Israelites were expelled from the land because they started a rebellion on the basis of Roman taxation.

> first was caused by what they have placed in Torah.

To what are you referring?

> The second is because of their doing to Talmud.

To what are you referring?

> Midrash is not the inspired holy Word of God. Midrash is not sacred writings, but instead human commentary. Midrash has no authority, only interest.

Jesus used them. Midrash contains God's revelations as Jews lost the touch with their revelation. Midrash series include manmade commentary on Torah as well as God's explanation.

> Anybody can write anything they want. Who cares. We recognize as authoritative only the writings from God (the Old and New Testaments).

Then come up with another scripture. You are bound with God's revelation and there is no escape from Him.

> Yes, that's from a century or much more after Jesus. It's not authoritative, but only of historical interest. I really couldn't care what it says about Jesus and Mary. It has no Scriptural authority. I'm sure I could find some writings about Mohammed from 8th century Europe, about 150 years after his life, that would not be so complimentary. And about those you would say, "Those have no authority. We only follow the Qur'an and the Hadith." Same here. The Talmud has no authority to tell us anything about Jesus and Mary.

Jews have saved these Midrash notes for themselves when Christian scholars discovered Gospel and started studiying the Torah Midrash hence Talmud became part of religious teaching througout (at least in larger circles then before) in Roman Empire.

Midrash existed before they were written, putting them on paper doesn't change they weren't from God or Jesus used them.

Please share freely what has been found about Quran, God's latest revelation, 150 years after late Prophet's death.

What is placed in Talmud brought the second expulsion of Israelites from their land, first was caused by what they have placed in Torah. The second is because of their doing to Talmud.

> Midrash is the series of explanations of Torah.

Midrash is not the inspired holy Word of God. Midrash is not sacred writings, but instead human commentary. Midrash has no authority, only interest.

> After Jesus rested his soul these oral traditions started to put on paper.

Anybody can write anything they want. Who cares. We recognize as authoritative only the writings from God (the Old and New Testaments).

> The Wikipedia article about the Talmud.

Yes, that's from a century or much more after Jesus. It's not authoritative, but only of historical interest. I really couldn't care what it says about Jesus and Mary. It has no Scriptural authority. I'm sure I could find some writings about Mohammed from 8th century Europe, about 150 years after his life, that would not be so complimentary. And about those you would say, "Those have no authority. We only follow the Qur'an and the Hadith." Same here. The Talmud has no authority to tell us anything about Jesus and Mary.

> Again, this is not true. There is no evidence that anyone slandered anything to Mary. Please give a reference to show what you're talking about.

Midrash is the series of explanations of Torah. After Jesus rested his soul these oral traditions started to put on paper. Jesus used allegories and stories used in these series as well as aspects which exist here but not in Torah. Jesus or any individual could only have a grasp of this information from these series only if they studied at multiple different schools or clergymen at his time. Jesus was supported by Gabriel about revelations given to Israelites.

From a common source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_the_Talmud

It is a clean cut summary about Jesus and his mother Mary.

All other notes you have made are based on Christology wars, you have a Book sent by God and it is very explanatory.

> Judaism is a belief system which has no relation or basis from God's revelations.

In contrast, Judaism is DEFINED by God's revelations. That's the whole point in Judaism: God has revealed Himself. God has spoken. And God desires a personal relationship with His people.

> People who claim to follow that belief system had been openly damned by the mouth of David

Once again, there is nothing true about this. I have been saying this about your input a lot. And whenever I ask for references to substantiate what you're saying, you don't provide them. But here I go again: Where did David condemn the Jewish people? Please give me some references to show that this has ANY truth to it.

> the first occurred once people who claim to be following Judaism declared Solomon an idolator then divided his regime into parts

This is not true. The people never declared Solomon to be an idolater. God did, but the people didn't. They never rebelled against Solomon. They rebelled against his son, Rehoboam, because of the tax load he put on them (1 Ki. 12.1-4ff.)

> the second occurred, once the people who claim to be following Judaism, declared that they have killed the Messiah and slandered to Mary mother of Jesus

Again, this is not true. There is no evidence that anyone slandered anything to Mary. Please give a reference to show what you're talking about.

> God asks to people who claim to follow Judaism, if they say a verity from the religion then why did they killed and obliterated multiple newsbearers sent by God?

They killed his prophets because they were apostate, corrupt, and godless. They had fallen from the truth.

> So if you think Christianity has a relationship with Judaism, then you would be ready to be treated in the same manner.

Yes, we are ready to suffer and be rejected (2 Tim. 3.12; 1 Peter 4.12-14). Jesus prophesied it (Jn. 15.18).

> God openly denies the right to lend money with usury even in the famous Deuteronomy verse in the Hebrew original, but people who have ill behaviour in their hearts pervert the meaning of that single verb to give "raise" meaning.

You're correct that people pervert the meaning, and in their greed they ignore it. But don't blame that on Christianity.

> God knows what hypocrites and non-believers do. And He is enough to solve all the matters. Jesus warned about this sort of behaviour in Gospels

This is all correct.

> and when he said "love your enemy" he underlined the not so naive misconceptions pinned to Torah.

I don't know what you mean by this. Please explain.

> And Jesus has died like any other human being al-e Emran 3:55.

But isa is the only prophet who has power over death (Surah 3.49). Not even Muhammad had that power. Allah demonstrated his power through Isa. Surah 4.50 instructs Muslims to obey Isa.

> Letters have no precedence over Jesus' teachings, if Jesus is as you claim you shouldn't take letters of Paul into consideration.

As Christians, we take all of the sacred writings as coming from God and of equal weight. He taught truth through the prophets, He taught truth through His Son, Jesus, and He taught truth through Paul and all the other writers. The words of Jesus are not unique. What is unique about Jesus is that He is God, He died to save us from our sins, and He rose from the dead to conquer death. But His teachings are the same revelation from God as the other writers of the Bible.

> But if you don't take into consideration then Jesus isn't as you define.

This is incorrect. Jesus is divine because of who He is, not because of what He said.

Judaism is a belief system which has no relation or basis from God's revelations. People who claim to follow that belief system had been openly damned by the mouth of David and Jesus. God had cast expulsion from their lands twice on these people,

* the first occurred once people who claim to be following Judaism declared Solomon an idolator then divided his regime into parts
* the second occurred, once the people who claim to be following Judaism, declared that they have killed the Messiah and slandered to Mary mother of Jesus

God asks to people who claim to follow Judaism, if they say a verity from the religion then why did they killed and obliterated multiple newsbearers sent by God?

So if you think Christianity has a relationship with Judaism, then you would be ready to be treated in the same manner. God openly denies the right to lend money with usury even in the famous Deuteronomy verse in the Hebrew original, but people who have ill behaviour in their hearts pervert the meaning of that single verb to give "raise" meaning.

God knows what hypocrites and non-believers do. And He is enough to solve all the matters. Jesus warned about this sort of behaviour in Gospels, and when he said "love your enemy" he underlined the not so naive misconceptions pinned to Torah.

Again, in al-e Emran 3:45-46, talks about God's decree. We are all God's decrees, so is Jesus. And Jesus has died like any other human being al-e Emran 3:55.

> I don't know what you mean by this. God showed Himself at least in a partial way to Moses. Jesus showed an "emptied" part of Himself to the world (Phil. 2.7). No one can see God in His fullness and live.

Letters have no precedence over Jesus' teachings, if Jesus is as you claim you shouldn't take letters of Paul into consideration.
But if you don't take into consideration then Jesus isn't as you define.

> Gospel contains God's decrees and wisdom, its message overlaps with Torah and others too.

Yes it does, but this is both moot and a red herring. It is Jesus, not the book, that is sovereign. It is Jesus that is holy. (I don't think the Bible ever calls God's revelation holy.)

> I can pick any sentence of yours and turn you in to "son of god" like some people claimed for Jesus.

Nah, ya can't.

> There are plenty of son of god in Torah and Gospel, but the verses you have picked is cut in half.

There are a few, but Jesus uses the term differently, and the term is used of him differently. When I say, "I love you" to my spouse, I mean it differently than when I say "I love you" to my dog. Context matters. If I'm going to the store and I tell my wife, "I'm leaving," it has a very different meaning than if she and I have had a huge fight and I yell, "I'm leaving." Context matters.

> Jesus is a creation of God as he says and again

There is nothing true about this. Jesus is NEVER spoken of as a creation of God. NEVER. If you claim this, you have to show where the Bible says it. Reference, please.

> if God were to be like in any shape of 28K+ denominations of Christianity, there would be marks of that form in each and every revelation.

I don't know what this means.

> whoever from clergy you direct this question they cannot close the loop of
how Jesus is son of god, or how immaculate conception happened

Of course we can. It's easy. The conception of Jesus happened by a miracle of the Holy Spirit. Therefore Jesus is conceived by the Holy Spirit (the "son" of God) and born of the virgin Mary (a human being; son of humankind). By "son" we mean:

* The theological necessity of the incarnation, that Jesus would actually be born in human flesh.
* To emphasize the uniqueness of Jesus’s relationship with YHWH in personal fellowship.
* To emphasize the sending of the 2nd person of the Trinity on a mission.
* To emphasize the “one-bloodness,” so to speak, kinship relationship of YHWH and Jesus. They share a nature; they are of the same essence.

There's no loop in logic any more than there's a loop in the logic of science. There are many examples from science where two are also one.

All physical reality has a dual nature. Mass and energy are, at least in principle, inter-convertible, through nuclear fission or fusion reactions. It's part of what E = mc^2 is all about. We can, therefore, legitimately speak of the universe as a "space-light-time" universe. Light, as you know, is a paradox—exhibiting characteristics of both waves and particles, and yet it definitely behaves as a wave in some instances and as a particle in others. Scientists know this duality applies both in radiations of electro-magnetic energy as well as in the atomic structure of matter, in which the orbiting electron also likewise behaves both as a particle and as a wave.

Black holes are places in space where gravity is so strong that even light can’t escape, but no one has ever been able to say what happens inside a black hole. Stephen Hawking has theorized that rather than being stored within the "grip" of a black hole, information from "within" a black hole actually remains outside of it and is therefore theoretically accessible. So Hawking says information that is inside a black hole is outside a black hole—a paradox or a "self-contradiction"?

In quantum mechanics there is a principle called superposition, where subatomic particles are able to exist in two states simultaneously. This again may be a kind of analogy, if that helps.

For another potential scientific "validation" of such possibilities, in 2017 a group of quantum scientists (University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai) successfully teleported a photon from earth to a satellite in orbit. It's called quantum entanglement. As far as our discussion here, quantum entanglement means that the two quantum objects share a wave function and share the same identity, even when separated. What happens to one happens to the other—wherever it exists. They are more than identical twins, the article said, "the two are one and the same." Apparently, according to the article, when they interact with matter on Earth they lose certain aspects of entanglement, but in the vacuum of space, they can extend infinitely (eternally). It's just interesting.

> Jesus is holy according to Quran as asteroid belt is.

The Qur'an teaches (Surah 3.45-46) that Isa is holy as Allah is. That's presumably different from an asteroid belt. The Bible teaches that Jesus is holy as is God the Father, meaning He is separate from all creation, distinct and "other," transcendent as well as immanent.

> Jesus known to pray regularly, fast

Jesus prayed regularly, but fasted only once that we know of. He was sometimes criticized because his disciples didn't fast (The Injil: Mk. 2.18). We don't know that Jesus fasted any time other than before His temptation in the wilderness.

> had a proper attire

We know absolutely nothing about Jesus's attire.

> Christians are the group of people who redefined their lifestyle.

Yes. Christians are not bound to a particular culture, language, or lifestyle as Muslims are. We are free.

> God is Exalted, if He were to show His face or a thing from His level, He would show Himself on the mountain to Moses. If Jesus didn't existed then it is a proof that he is created.

I don't know what you mean by this. God showed Himself at least in a partial way to Moses. Jesus showed an "emptied" part of Himself to the world (Phil. 2.7). No one can see God in His fullness and live.

> Jesus makes reverances to another entity "the God"

Yes he does, twice, I think (Mk. 15.34; Jn. 20.17). He is speaking of God the Father (same verse). Notice He never puts himself on the level of other humans. It's always "my Father" and "your Father" (never "our Father," except in the Lord's Prayer when he was teaching the people how they should pray), "my God" and "your God," (never "our God").

This kind of language does not fit with a later writer bent on creating the idea that Jesus was God. The reason for his distinction is not, of course, that there are two gods, but rather that her relationship with God was different from his. He is the eternal Son of the Father; she, as well as all the disciples, had become a member of the family by receiving Him (cf. John 1.12). Both relationships concerned only one God.

> As Christians we are not people of the book, but instead Jesus-followers. It is Jesus who is holy (as the Qur'an also admits), Jesus whom we follow, and Jesus who is Almighty God. It is Jesus, not the book, who is sovereign. The Bible is a revelation of Jesus, not a rulebook that we worship.

Gospel contains God's decrees and wisdom, its message overlaps with Torah and others too. I can pick any sentence of yours and turn you in to "son of god" like some people claimed for Jesus.

There are plenty of son of god in Torah and Gospel, but the verses you have picked is cut in half. Jesus is a creation of God as he says and again

if God were to be like in any shape of 28K+ denominations of Christianity, there would be marks of that form in each and every revelation.

Moreover Christians wouldn't be divided into cliques because of this non existing definition in any scripture. We can admit Judgment Day but we can't understand the concept of Jesus, whoever from clergy you direct this question they cannot close the loop of

how Jesus is son of god, or how immaculate conception happened

There is always a loop in logic, because it doesn't match with Jesus' teachings.

God's each and every creation is holy, He uses words for everybody, Jesus is holy according to Quran as asteroid belt is.

Jesus known to pray regularly, fast and had a proper attire, Christians are the group of people who redefined their lifestyle.

God is Exalted, if He were to show His face or a thing from His level, He would show Himself on the mountain to Moses. If Jesus didn't existed then it is a proof that he is created.

Jesus makes reverances to another entity "the God"