The REAL problem with Islam

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

that was NOT NOT NOT the issue. read the first post again. he did not introduce the actions of observers of any religion. you did

My amusement was satisfied for the moment so I moved on to the actual topic

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

The issue was this: Was the Quran divinely inspired or not. It is claimed it is not due to the actions of those who claim to practice Islam. It amuses me greatly, as you well know, to apply that same logic to christianity however there is no doubt from my side that the outlined laws in the bible handed to Moses WERE in fact divinely inspired.

The Quran, laws of the Quran, teachings of the Quran, description of how to conduct oneself in the Quran, all parallel the bible up to and through the time of Jesus.

After the gospels (which you know are believed to be partially suspect anyway due to their numerous inconsistancies which I recall you say are because different writers remember the event in a different light, which is understandable HOWEVER the inconsistancies themselves denote that they are not, in fact, divinely inspired) the two sets of beliefs diverge.

The issues that you as christians have with Islam and Islamic law are in fact issues that are peppered through your own bible and are similar to BUT less stringent.

It is my observation that if you have a problem with one, you must by default have a problem with the other which means that you have issues with divinely inspired laws. That is the fundamental difference between you and I.

Conclusion: If you say one is not divinely inspired then the other cannot be either. That leaves you with nothing inspired, the transition inconsistant, and the rest of it completely in conflict with the first and simply leaves us with a code that is at a minimum 2,400 years old and is the oldest living set of laws practiced by humanity on record.

Now this is interesting. you seem to be saying that if one Book is divinely inspired, the other must be also.

The problem I have with Islam is as follows:

1. I believe the Bible is the revealed, transmitted, preserved Word of God, the 'Book from Heaven.' I believe it contains an accurate and true record of Jesus, His ministry, His death, His burial, His resurrection. Since I believe Jesus rose from the dead, I therefore believe He is the Christ. The record of His death, burial, and resurrection was testified to by His apostles. Those apostles left behind their Testimony in what we call 'the new testament' writings. If God is real, and Jesus is the Christ, then His apostles are authoritative and true emissaries of God to mankind. Therefore their teaching is the true teaching of God.

Now, since I believe #1 above to be true, I must by default believe the following:

2. A further revelation purporting to be from God that contradicts or fails to affirm in all details the earlier apostolic teaching(s) must be false, for those apostles taught us to reject any teaching that did not comport with their testimony.

1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. 5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. 6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

And again,

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

And such like warnings. In other words, a teacher or emissary of God - if truly sent by God - will affirm all the teachings of the apostles, and will not contradict them or deny them, or attempt to substitute additional revelations or doctrines or traditions or practices in their place.

I find that Islam does this.

an-Nisa 4:157 And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.

The apostles' main message was that Jesus was crucified and died, and was raised again immortal as the firstfruits of the Resurrection. The emissary Mohammed has claimed that Jesus was not crucified, did not die, and was not Resurrected (but that He was only taken up to heaven to await the time of His return). Furthermore, Mariam 19:33 says "And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive." This says that Jesus will one day die, and be raised again.

But the apostles have taught us that Jesus has already died, and already been raised from death into immortality, and dieth no more.

Now, you also said this - "The issues that you as christians have with Islam and Islamic law are in fact issues that are peppered through your own bible and are similar to BUT less stringent."

First of all, what any individual Christian believes (or fails to believe) is not conclusive of what Christianity teaches, in and of itself. And the same of course applies to Islam. Individuals may err in their own faith and religion, by not understanding or knowing or even believing all that is taught to them, or by not having all taught to them to begin with.

I would suggest that many people object to Sharia, for example, because they find it 'objectionable' and contrary to their Enlightenment-humanistic sensibilities. But they are not representative of the Christian doctrinal objection to Sharia or to Islam.

I have found that many professing Christians would be as opposed to Biblical law being enforced in society as they would Sharia. And I have always wondered about this. Why would Christians prefer satan's rule of society over God's? I believe it is because of a false understanding of God's laws, and of the nature of the false doctrine of 'secularism' which claims that the civil society is somehow to be exempted from obedience to God.

The second Psalm reads -

1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,

3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

Civil government conspires to be 'free from God' but God laughs at them in derision, and replies that Christ has been anointed as KING (ruler).

As Christians we are commanded to pray 'thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven'. If this is not a prayer for all society to submit to JESUS Christ, the Anointed One of God, then it is nothing.

[Walks_in_islam]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Now this is interesting. you seem to be saying that if one Book is divinely inspired, the other must be also.

The problem I have with Islam is as follows:

1. I believe the Bible is the revealed, transmitted, preserved Word of God, the 'Book from Heaven.' I believe it contains an accurate and true record of Jesus, His ministry, His death, His burial, His resurrection. Since I believe Jesus rose from the dead, I therefore believe He is the Christ. The record of His death, burial, and resurrection was testified to by His apostles. Those apostles left behind their Testimony in what we call 'the new testament' writings. If God is real, and Jesus is the Christ, then His apostles are authoritative and true emissaries of God to mankind. Therefore their teaching is the true teaching of God.

Now, since I believe #1 above to be true, I must by default believe the following:

2. A further revelation purporting to be from God that contradicts or fails to affirm in all details the earlier apostolic teaching(s) must be false, for those apostles taught us to reject any teaching that did not comport with their testimony.

1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. 5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. 6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

And again,

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

And such like warnings. In other words, a teacher or emissary of God - if truly sent by God - will affirm all the teachings of the apostles, and will not contradict them or deny them, or attempt to substitute additional revelations or doctrines or traditions or practices in their place.

I find that Islam does this.

an-Nisa 4:157 And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah ." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain.

The apostles' main message was that Jesus was crucified and died, and was raised again immortal as the firstfruits of the Resurrection. The emissary Mohammed has claimed that Jesus was not crucified, did not die, and was not Resurrected (but that He was only taken up to heaven to await the time of His return). Furthermore, Mariam 19:33 says "And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive." This says that Jesus will one day die, and be raised again.

But the apostles have taught us that Jesus has already died, and already been raised from death into immortality, and dieth no more.

Now, you also said this - "The issues that you as christians have with Islam and Islamic law are in fact issues that are peppered through your own bible and are similar to BUT less stringent."

First of all, what any individual Christian believes (or fails to believe) is not conclusive of what Christianity teaches, in and of itself. And the same of course applies to Islam. Individuals may err in their own faith and religion, by not understanding or knowing or even believing all that is taught to them, or by not having all taught to them to begin with.

I would suggest that many people object to Sharia, for example, because they find it 'objectionable' and contrary to their Enlightenment-humanistic sensibilities. But they are not representative of the Christian doctrinal objection to Sharia or to Islam.

I have found that many professing Christians would be as opposed to Biblical law being enforced in society as they would Sharia. And I have always wondered about this. Why would Christians prefer satan's rule of society over God's? I believe it is because of a false understanding of God's laws, and of the nature of the false doctrine of 'secularism' which claims that the civil society is somehow to be exempted from obedience to God.

The second Psalm reads -

1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,

3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

Civil government conspires to be 'free from God' but God laughs at them in derision, and replies that Christ has been anointed as KING (ruler).

As Christians we are commanded to pray 'thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven'. If this is not a prayer for all society to submit to JESUS Christ, the Anointed One of God, then it is nothing.

Laws and penalties and the basis for those laws and penalties that are spelled out in one book that are identical to laws and penalties / basis that are spelled out in another are deemed inspired by the christian church in one book and evil in another.

Surah 157 speaks of the Jews who still believe this to this day.

004.157 And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
004.158 But Allah took him up unto Himself. Allah was ever Mighty, Wise.
004.159 There is not one of the People of the Scripture but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them -

Sanhedrin 43a: "On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu (Jesus) was hanged...Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defense could be made? Was he not a Mesith (enticer)?"

At any rate, Surah 19 does not refer to Jesus. It refers to Yahya (John) who in 19:7-10 was referenced as the son of Zechariah (who was struck dumb for 3 days as a sign) and who is also known in the gospels as John the Baptist. He is listed as a Prophet in Islam.

I do understand that you have a problem between the two books but the Quran does not say Jesus did not die in one place and that Jesus did die in another.

Is Jesus dead? No? Then the Quran is correct. Yes? Then the Sanhedran is correct. Islamic scholars have tried to explain this passage by proposing that somehow a "replacement" was made on the Roman cross but all the Quran actually states is that the Jews believed they killed him but they did not and that he was taken up into Heaven alive. (SOME) of your gospels say the same thing however it is a certain fact that none of the gospels agree on what happened before or during the crucifixion, what Jesus and the criminals beside him said or did, and what the circumstances were in the days following. It is also a fact that 5 verses were ADDED to the last chapter in Mark which original text ends when the women saw a man who told them Jesus was not there and they ran away not telling anyone. Every word after that was penned onto the original text at some later date. So EVERYTHING about that event is actually conjecture, which the Quran quietly notes.

It is interesting that your interpretation of the Lord's Prayer implies somehow that Jesus taught his followers "pray to me". None of the gospels indicate that Jesus actually taught this and the Quran also teaches that prayer is to be directed to the God of Abraham and to nobody else.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Divine inspiration: (n) def:

A Southern Baptist Missionary tortured his son when he was 12-years old in a felonious attempt cure him of his homosexuality, torture which included months of aversion therapy, like home electro-shock “therapy,” burning and freezing of his hands, and emotional abuse, including being told he had AIDS and was the only gay person alive and the U.S. government would kill him if they found him, according to the son, Samuel Brinton, who grew up in Iowa.

“My dad just started punching,” Samuel says. “That was the first day that I was sent to the emergency room, because I had ‘fallen down the stairs.’” He adds that he was sent to the emergency room “six more times,” and describes the unimaginable physical and emotional torture perpetrated on him by his family.

“Physical therapy was my hands being tied down and blocks of ice being placed on my hands. Then pictures f men holding hand would be shown to be so that way I would associate the concept of the pain of the ice with a man touching me.”

“Then we went into heat. Coils would be wrapped around my hands and you would be able to turn the heat on or off. So now if we had a picture of a guy and a girl hugging,t here was no pain. If we had a picture of a guy and a guy hugging, we had physical pain.”

“We then went into the ‘Month of Hell,’” Brinton explains in the video below. “The ‘Month of Hell’ consisted of tiny needles being stuck into my fingers and then pictures of explicit acts between men would be shown and I’d be electrocuted.”

Brinton says that during an attempted suicide, his mother offered, “I’ll love you again if you just change.”

“Freezing ice cubes were placed in his hands while he was shown pictures of men hugging – so that he would associate pain with intimacy between men,” reports the Daily Mail. “He was then repeatedly burned when shown similar images but untouched when images of men and women together were shown.

“The Month of Hell consisted of tiny needles being stuck into my fingers and then pictures of explicit acts between men would be shown and I’d be electrocuted,” Samuel Brinton stated.

!!!Canya gimme a Hallelujah for God's inspiration in curing this boy!!!! Send me an offering and I'll cure yours too!

Shall we respond with radical "cures" in Islam???? You do what you condemn in others defining of your religion. If you want to be taken seriously intelligent discussion would serve you best.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Yeah those burning crosses from one end to the other across the South aren't a problem and there are no christian terrorists either. Besides it's way more fair to limit comments to christian ministers but I'll pull from your ranks too.

Eric Robert Rudolph (born September 19, 1966), also known as the Olympic Park Bomber, is a Christian terrorist responsible for a series of anti-abortion and anti-gay-motivated bombings across the southern United States between 1996 and 1998, which killed two people and injured at least 150 others

During the twentieth century, members of extremist groups such as the Army of God began executing attacks against abortion clinics and doctors across the United States. The motive for anti-abortionist Scott Roeder murdering Wichita doctor George Tiller on May 31, 2009 was a belief that abortion is criminal and immoral, and that this belief went "hand in hand" with his religious beliefs

Hutaree (i/huːˈtɑriː/) is a militia movement group adhering to the ideology of the Christian Patriot movement, based near Adrian, Michigan, in the United States. The group was formed in early 2006. The name "Hutaree" appears to be a neologism; the group's web site says that it means "Christian warriors". The group became widely known in 2010 after the FBI prosecuted them in federal court for an alleged plan for violent revolt. The prosecution said this was to have involved killing a police officer and attacking the funeral with bombs.

Problem with your responses, you cannot find a single major Christian organization in the world that would embrace the evil the you present. To find a major Islamic organization that embraces torture of gays would be very easy. You are dishonest in your arguments.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Divine inspiration: (n) def:

A Southern Baptist Missionary tortured his son when he was 12-years old in a felonious attempt cure him of his homosexuality, torture which included months of aversion therapy, like home electro-shock “therapy,” burning and freezing of his hands, and emotional abuse, including being told he had AIDS and was the only gay person alive and the U.S. government would kill him if they found him, according to the son, Samuel Brinton, who grew up in Iowa.

“My dad just started punching,” Samuel says. “That was the first day that I was sent to the emergency room, because I had ‘fallen down the stairs.’” He adds that he was sent to the emergency room “six more times,” and describes the unimaginable physical and emotional torture perpetrated on him by his family.

“Physical therapy was my hands being tied down and blocks of ice being placed on my hands. Then pictures f men holding hand would be shown to be so that way I would associate the concept of the pain of the ice with a man touching me.”

“Then we went into heat. Coils would be wrapped around my hands and you would be able to turn the heat on or off. So now if we had a picture of a guy and a girl hugging,t here was no pain. If we had a picture of a guy and a guy hugging, we had physical pain.”

“We then went into the ‘Month of Hell,’” Brinton explains in the video below. “The ‘Month of Hell’ consisted of tiny needles being stuck into my fingers and then pictures of explicit acts between men would be shown and I’d be electrocuted.”

Brinton says that during an attempted suicide, his mother offered, “I’ll love you again if you just change.”

“Freezing ice cubes were placed in his hands while he was shown pictures of men hugging – so that he would associate pain with intimacy between men,” reports the Daily Mail. “He was then repeatedly burned when shown similar images but untouched when images of men and women together were shown.

“The Month of Hell consisted of tiny needles being stuck into my fingers and then pictures of explicit acts between men would be shown and I’d be electrocuted,” Samuel Brinton stated.

!!!Canya gimme a Hallelujah for God's inspiration in curing this boy!!!! Send me an offering and I'll cure yours too!

The fruit of this man's life demonstrates he was not a Christian. Someone led by the Spirit of God would not do these things. So your argument is not valid.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Yeah those burning crosses from one end to the other across the South aren't a problem and there are no christian terrorists either. Besides it's way more fair to limit comments to christian ministers but I'll pull from your ranks too.

Eric Robert Rudolph (born September 19, 1966), also known as the Olympic Park Bomber, is a Christian terrorist responsible for a series of anti-abortion and anti-gay-motivated bombings across the southern United States between 1996 and 1998, which killed two people and injured at least 150 others

During the twentieth century, members of extremist groups such as the Army of God began executing attacks against abortion clinics and doctors across the United States. The motive for anti-abortionist Scott Roeder murdering Wichita doctor George Tiller on May 31, 2009 was a belief that abortion is criminal and immoral, and that this belief went "hand in hand" with his religious beliefs

Hutaree (i/huːˈtɑriː/) is a militia movement group adhering to the ideology of the Christian Patriot movement, based near Adrian, Michigan, in the United States. The group was formed in early 2006. The name "Hutaree" appears to be a neologism; the group's web site says that it means "Christian warriors". The group became widely known in 2010 after the FBI prosecuted them in federal court for an alleged plan for violent revolt. The prosecution said this was to have involved killing a police officer and attacking the funeral with bombs.

Again, by Biblical definition, those people are not Christians. So again, none of this is relevant as to whether or not Islam is a divinely inspired faith.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

IF you believe the bible is the Word of God, then Islam is by definition a WHAT????

Are you having problems with your own bible?

"‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads. (Leviticus 20:13)

13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

Maybe christianity is a false religion if it rants against passages in the bible itself? I do not see TORTURE in the bible though. Perhaps that's a "christian" thing

You obviously do not not know enough about the Bible to quote it in context. The passages you quoted were for national Israel under the Old Covenant and not commands for the New Testament Church under the New Covenant.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Laws and penalties and the basis for those laws and penalties that are spelled out in one book that are identical to laws and penalties / basis that are spelled out in another are deemed inspired by the christian church in one book and evil in another.

I do not have a problem with a Koranic affirmation of a Biblical law, as long as it is affirms the biblical law as written and interpreted by the prophets and apostles.

Surah 157 speaks of the Jews who still believe this to this day.

004.157 And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
004.158 But Allah took him up unto Himself. Allah was ever Mighty, Wise.
004.159 There is not one of the People of the Scripture but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them -

Sanhedrin 43a: "On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu (Jesus) was hanged...Do you suppose that he was one for whom a defense could be made? Was he not a Mesith (enticer)?"

Does this sura not teach that Jesus did not die, was not crucified, that an imposter/replacement was involved? If so, then the Koran teaches contrary to the apostles and therefore I conclude it must be false teaching.

At any rate, Surah 19 does not refer to Jesus. It refers to Yahya (John) who in 19:7-10 was referenced as the son of Zechariah (who was struck dumb for 3 days as a sign) and who is also known in the gospels as John the Baptist. He is listed as a Prophet in Islam.

I have read Muslim teachers who say this sura speaks of Jesus, that he will return, and die. Does not the Koran teach that all will die once? If Jesus then is not dead, then he must (according to Koran) die at some time in the future. Is this not Islamic teaching? Or am I misinformed?

I do understand that you have a problem between the two books but the Quran does not say Jesus did not die in one place and that Jesus did die in another.

No, not that he did not die and then he did die, but rather that he did not die, and he WILL (future tense) die.

[quote]Is Jesus dead? No? Then the Quran is correct. [quote]

Not necessarily, for the Koran denies (does it not?) that Jesus died AND RESURRECTED FROM THE DEAD?

Yes? Then the Sanhedran is correct.

No, for the talmud denies Jesus is the Christ and that he RESURRECTED FROM THE DEAD.

Islamic scholars have tried to explain this passage by proposing that somehow a "replacement" was made on the Roman cross but all the Quran actually states is that the Jews believed they killed him but they did not and that he was taken up into Heaven alive. (SOME) of your gospels say the same thing however it is a certain fact that none of the gospels agree on what happened before or during the crucifixion, what Jesus and the criminals beside him said or did, and what the circumstances were in the days following.

The 'disagreements' between the four gospel accounts you claim have been dealt with many times before over the centuries. I too have looked at that issue and concluded the disagreements are not 'disagreements' and do in fact harmonize, they are not mutually exlusive.

It is also a fact that 5 verses were ADDED to the last chapter in Mark which original text ends when the women saw a man who told them Jesus was not there and they ran away not telling anyone. Every word after that was penned onto the original text at some later date. So EVERYTHING about that event is actually conjecture, which the Quran quietly notes.

Nonsense, the shorter ending of Mark is found in a few manuscfripts/texts which were never used but stored away in closets by the papacy to be 'revealed' conveniently at the same time liberal anti-Christian 'scholarship' subverted biblical studies.

It is interesting that your interpretation of the Lord's Prayer implies somehow that Jesus taught his followers "pray to me". None of the gospels indicate that Jesus actually taught this and the Quran also teaches that prayer is to be directed to the God of Abraham and to nobody else.

I never said that. I said that the so called 'Lord's prayer' ( a misnomer, it is actually the disciples' prayer) commands us to pray for the kingdom of God to come. God has identified Messiah as 'king' in his kingdom, therefore for the kingdom of God to come, for his will to be done on earth, the nations must submit to JESUS Christ as Lord and King.

I DO believe that Jesus is the human embodiment and manifestation of God in the flesh, the visible image of the invisible God, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, etc... but that was not my point in my remarks on the prayer we are commanded to pray.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Originalist

You obviously do not not know enough about the Bible to quote it in context. The passages you quoted were for national Israel under the Old Covenant and not commands for the New Testament Church under the New Covenant.

The main issue people seem to confuse is the fact that civil society/civil government has a responsibility to God to punish evil and reward good (Romans 13), but the church is not the instrument that replaces civil government (at least not in this age). Our job is to declare unto all - including the powers that be - the Word of God. THEIR job is to submit to God's Word.

We will, however, judge the world in the age to come.