Biblical hero Joseph 'was really a Muslim'-Palestinians make astonishing claim

WorldNetDaily ^ | February 14, 2008 | Aaron Klein

[SJackson]

Biblical hero Joseph 'was really a Muslim' Palestinians make astonishing claim, deny they'll help restore burned tomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Building at Joseph's Tomb site after Palestinian Authority took control in 2000 .

In the wake of an attempt by Palestinians to burn down Joseph's Tomb – Judaism's third holiest site – Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction issued a statement denying it will help restore the shrine, referring to both the shrine and the biblical patriarch as "Muslim."

"Pay no attention to the rumors that we will work with Israel to restore the burial site of the holy Muslim Joseph," said the statement, issued from Nablus, the biblical city of Shechem. "We are going to guard this holy Muslim site."

Joseph's Tomb is the believed burial place of the son of Jacob who was sold by his brothers into slavery and later became viceroy of Egypt.

[John Leland 1789]

“This means his Church is a visible organization. It must have characteristics that clearly identify it and that distinguish it from other churches.” (AN UNBROKEN HISTORY)

---

Well, parts of the Church which is Christ’s Body (Ephesians 1:17-23) are visible, and parts are not. You can’t see those who are already with Christ in Heaven.

I am enjoying this for another reason. There are actually some Baptists who we call, “Baptist-Briders.” What do they believe? Well if you were to remove the words Catholic from your post, AN UNBROKEN HISTORY, and insert the word “Baptist,” it would be a summary of their doctrine. Funny. And I teach against that mess, too.

[Cronos]

I gave you a list of reasons from internal evidence in the Scriptures why it is not reasonable to believe that Peter was ever a Bishop in Rome.

No, you didn't. All you said was "Peter was not supposed to preach to Gentiles", completely forgetting that there were Jews in Rome. At no point in the Bible does it say "Peter was not in Rome"

Your only answer to that was "oh, there was a massive conspiracy and everything in history is wrong except what I, John L, say". After you see this proof, then you say, "oh no, that was revisionist and distorted" and then you say that the Bible was revised and distorted as it comes from The Church

[Cronos]

Why do you need to use the word, “Universal” (”Catholic”)? Why do you try to equate it with anything in the Scriptures?

Because it is The Church, founded by Christ, as opposed to little sects/cults. We are not a sect but are the Original Church of Christ, founded by Christ and led by His Apostles. We are Catholic as in we are not the Church of Calvin or The Church of Luther or the Church of John Leland, we are The Church of Christ.

Why do you try to equate it with anything in the Scriptures? So, you say the same thing about the Trinity.

[John Leland 1789]

” . . . Bible was revised and distorted as it comes from The Church”

---

This applied to the text-type your “church” organization chiefly uses.

I gave you a list of seven or eight items; an actual list. You just brushed it aside for external histories written by people that need to defend your church’s ecclesiology.

[Cronos]

I gave you a list of seven or eight items; an actual list

No, you didn't -- you just said "The Bible never said Peter was in Rome, hence he wasn't". I guess you say the Trinity isn't true because it's not in The Bible????

[John Leland 1789]

Check post no. 245 for the list.