Monday, June 29, 2009

VideoBlog #6: Hate Messages in Dearborn

Was the Dearborn Arab Festival a loving, family event? We have already seen that security was rather aggressive, and that civil rights were being curtailed. We will now see, quite apart from any Christian involvement, the atmosphere at the Arab festival was one which entailed hatred.

55 comments:

David Wood said...

Wait! This can't be right! Our friend at the Fot Foundation has given us his version of events in Dearborn. Everything was sunshine and roses, until the mean and angry Nabeel Qureshi decided to ask a question.

The problem with this view, of course, is that, unlike Fot, we were there, and we know what the atmosphere was like. It was an atmosphere of hatred against Christians and Jews, as this video helps demonstrate (though not nearly as much as our video of the attack will demonstrate).

And no, Fot, we're not going to apologize for asking Muslims a question about Surah 9:29 at a festival in which Christians were being openly persecuted.

The Fat Man said...

Notice the banner, "Support our SCHOLORSHIP"

Nabeel Qureshi said...

This from their website, freepali.com:

The Palestinian issue is a very emotional one. Emotion is very real and understandable; however, freepali.com encourages all to inform and educate in an intelligible manner.

Fernando said...

Professor David Wood saide: «though not nearly as much as our video of the attack will demonstrate»... man... I'm already thinking too take some anxiolytics to cope withe the incrising expectattin I'm experience... please: do nott take too long: there're people suffering out here...

God bless...

The Fat Man said...

Nabeel Qureshi said...
This from their website, freepali.com:

The Palestinian issue is a very emotional one. Emotion is very real and understandable; however, freepali.com encourages all to inform and educate in an intelligible manner.

Yes and selling T shirts depicting a boy urinating on a Israeli flag is definitly INTELLIGIBLE

vijay said...

will someone give me the links of the first 2 videos i.e videoblog#2 and videoblog#2

thanks
vijay

Fernando said...

vijay saide: «will someone give me the links of the first 2 videos i.e videoblog#2 and videoblog#2»... they're nott from this happenings in Dearborn, buut, neber the less, you can find them in previous posts in this blogg: go to the top right hend corner of the main page of this blog and pinch "older posts"... God bless!!!

Christtheway said...

When are the debates going to be online? I have been waiting for a while now.

David Wood said...

Well, I was about to post Sam's debate with Farhan, but it seems that the Christians on this blog have lost all patience. As Nabeel pointed out, other sites take weeks or months to post a debate. Here on Answering Muslims, people start complaining if it's not up within hours.

I realize that I can't teach patience to my brothers by giving them everything they want. So perhaps a day or two more would do everyone some good.

(Here David laughs in an ominous and chilling voice, like Dr. Claw from Inspector Gadget.)

Christtheway said...

Dr. Claw from Inspector Gadget, lol and the reason we all are so impatient is because we all are supporters of you, Mary, Nabeel, Sam and the whole Answering Islam Crew and when u guys debate we know that u guys did an awesome refuting the muslims and just cant't wait to hear it

Bfoali said...

David would you mind giving me an answer as to where you actully went?
On the video you call it an Islamic festival, on the blog above the video you call it an arab festival. Im not claiming anything, so I hope you dont assume that I am, I just would like to know a definite answer.

Nabeel Qureshi said...

Bfoali--

This was an Arab Festival in Dearborn Michigan. David's point in calling it an Islamic festival was that Islam was by far the reigning force in the festival, as is seen by the oppression against Christians and the hatred towards Israel.

David Wood said...

Bfoali,

It was the Arab festival in Dearborn, Michigan, the city with the highest percentage of Muslims in the U.S. I called it an Islamic festival because Muslims were openly persecuting Christians.

David Wood said...

Oops. I see Nabeel responded before I did.

Semper Paratus said...

hahaha David,

Though I am excited to see the debates, I wasn't about to pester you guys to put them up any faster than you are able or had determined was good. Neverhteless, I'll happily learn a lesson in patience along with all the others who decided we needed it.

If I can put my two cents in, and hopefully it doesn't bother others who want them all up now, it might be worth considering spacing the debates out so that there is sufficient time to talk about them. Just a thought. Whatever you guys deem best...it is your prerogative, and I am certainly appreciative of the time and effort you guys put into all this.

May the Lord bless you and keep you...

Semper Paratus said...

My patience was rewarded: I downloaded it before it was erased. Thanks, David.

David Wood said...

You mean Sam's debate? The version that went up cut off the edges of the footage, so that the debaters are almost off screen. We're uploading the widescreen version, which should fix the problem.

Semper Paratus said...

Yeah, that debate. I just happened to be on youtube and it popped up, shortly after I said I am waiting patiently.

In any event, I am thankful, as I said before.

minoria said...

I have noticed the hatred of Israel is very common among Muslims.It's not an Arab thing.There are millions of Arabs who are Christian and yet they don't have a hatred of Israel.They may be indifferent,but it's better than what you see among the Muslims.On top of that in the Lebanon war the Christian Arabs were the allies of the Israelis.It's not a case of Arab versus Jew but Muslim Arab vs Jew.

The detail is anger at the 900,000 Arabs who became refugees in 1948.It didn't have to happen.Palestine was supposed to be divided into 2 parts:one completeley Arab and another with a slight Jewish majority(600,000 Arabs plus 600,000 and a bit more Jews).Of the Jews 450,000 were immigrants,only 150,000 were native born.

The Arabs or better said Muslims didn't want any partition but a 2 ethnic state.It could have worked if the Arabs had been Hindu,atheist,Buddhist or even Christian(and some were ).But the Muslims and Jews didn't get along.The result would have been massacres between the 2 groups.

It was to avoid that that the partition was done.Anybody remember India 1947?It was split into a Muslim part Pakistan ("land of the pure",no Hindus)and Hindu India.In spite of that Hindus and Muslims in both parts began killing each other and 500,000 died through direct violence.

On top of that 500,000 or 900,000 Jews were expelled from the Muslim Arab countries in the years following Israel's victories.What connection did they have with Israel defeating the Muslims?None,they were expelled only because of Judeophobia(not "Judaismophobia").Even though they had lived there for centuries.

Also Muslim hatred of Israel is a bit selective.East Pakistan separated from West Pakistan in 1971 and became Bangladesh.In less than 1 year the Pakistani army killed 3 million civilians and raped 250,000 women.The Muslim world said nothing,total indifference.Thousands of Muslims have been killed by Israel since 1967 and there is high hatred of Israel yet total indifference for 3 millin dead Muslims of Bangladesh.

The Fat Man said...

Any word if Mary Jo, is going to be debating a muslim woman in July?

David Wood said...

Things didn't work out. The Muslim woman moved to Canada. I tried to find a male Muslim to debate Mary Jo, but there weren't any takers.

nma said...

minoria said...

The detail is anger at the 900,000 Arabs who became refugees in 1948.


Not only that, but there are other factors. One of them is Muslims' losing lands they think was theirs, though they were originally Jewish lands. Another one is the issue of their absurd claim on the holy land, which Muslims falsely believe is theirs based on some false story in the Quran.

Fernando said...

Professor David Wood saide: «I realize that I can't teach patience to my brothers by giving them everything they want»...

ok, ok, ok, lesson taken... I'll start looking at «the flowers growing in the fields; they never seem anxious» (Mt 6:28)...

tnakes for your patience withe me...

george said...

yeah they are sellining those T shirts for scholarship???? scholarship for terrorist?

Jerusalem88 said...

Wood and Nabeel the debates with bassam zawadi, sami zaatari, and the other guys what happened. did you still not find any plcae to debate in.

Jerusalem88 said...

hahah David wood im sorry if i posted this two times but you know i didnt know that you must approve the comments so i thought it didnt work but now i know.

The Fat Man said...

David Wood said...
Things didn't work out. The Muslim woman moved to Canada. I tried to find a male Muslim to debate Mary Jo, but there weren't any takers.

Thats a real shame. I would love to hear a muslim woman defend her relegion from a womans perspective. Instead of hearing muslim men tell us how happy their woman are.

Confident Christianity said...

What? Mary Jo has NO ONE to debate? There are nearly 7 billion people on this planet......

Roger Sharp
Confident Christianity

Hogan Elijah Hagbard said...

Confident Christianity wrote:

What? Mary Jo has NO ONE to debate? There are nearly 7 billion people on this planet......

Elijah writes:

There is an entire pal-talk room devoted to women and islam, I think it is called 'muslim women are not oppressed' or something like that. The room is found on social issues.

I am sure therefore that muslims would be able to find at least one female who would be willing defend the muslim position.

IslamicFront said...

I will be the first muslim on here to Condemn those muslims for selling those types of t-shirts.
Its very un-islamic to sell that kind of stuff and david wood knows this but he wonts to portray like its ok to do this in islam. Witch it is not.

anyway i would like daivd wood to Condemn this Israeli t shirt warn
by the Military during the recent gaza war.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510135,00.html

because if you are going to condemn the muslims for this kind of thing. Then you should also condemn the Israeli army for buying and wareing such t-shirts during the war. (t- shirts also were being sold on e-bay now removed by e-bay).

David wood calls it hatefull. ok fine. so when the Israeli army buy and ware such t-shirts is it not
hate of the palestinian people?. please dont use double standards.

now if you look at the t-shirt you will see that the muslim woman is holding a AK47. the person who made the t-shirt is trying to apply that not just
all muslim men are terrorist but also the women.

And also you will notice that she is also pregnant. again applying kill to people with one bullet
in this case. so you see how much hate they have for palestinian people they dont wont muslims to be born they wont them all dead.
compared to this. pissing on isreal seems miner. but wrong non the less.

thanks for reading

oh b4 i go here is a closer look at the quran Surah 9(Verses 5 and 29) its a 2 part video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU5mes6ls_E&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjrfo8quomU&feature=channel_page

mmm it seems the muslims have got nothing to hide.

this probably will be my only comment

thanks

David Wood said...

Of course I will condemn a T-shirt calling for the murder of Palestinian women and babies. As far as I'm concerned, that's far worse than a T-shirt calling for peeing on a flag.

IslamicFront said...

Thanks david wood for condemning that t- shirt.
but in your video it seemed that you were saying all muslims accept this kind of thing. that is what it sounded like in the video.

i will say those muslims in the video are misinformed.

you should have said. this is not islamic and islam condemns this kind of thing..

David Wood said...

IslamicFront,

You seem to believe that Islam is, at its heart, peaceful. What, may I ask, do you do with passages such as the following:

Sahih al-Bukhari 6924—Allah’s Messenger said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: La ilaha illallah (none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and whoever said La ilaha illahllah, Allah will save his property and his life from me.”

Sahih Muslim 30—It is reported on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was guaranteed the protection of his property and life on my behalf except for the right, and his affairs rest with Allah.

Al-Tabari, Volume 10, p. 55—Abu Bakr to the Apostates: . . . “Verily God, may He be exalted, sent Muhammad with His truth to His creation as a bearer of good tidings and as a warner and as one calling [others] to God, with His permission, and as a light-bringing lamp, so that he might warn [all] who live, and so that the saying against the unbelievers might be fulfilled. So God guided with the truth whoever responded to Him, and the Apostle of God, with His permission, struck whoever turned his back to Him until he came to Islam, willingly or grudgingly.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2785—Narrated Abu Hurairah: A man came to Allah’s Messenger and said, “Guide me to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2787—Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Case into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2797—Narrated Abu Hurairah: The Prophet said, . . . “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then come back to life and then get martyred, and then come back to life again and then get martyred and then come back to life again and then get martyred.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2810—Narrated Abu Musa: A man came to the Prophet and asked, “A man fights for war booty; another fights for fame and a third fights for showing off; which of them is in Allah’s Cause?” The Prophet said, “He who fights that Allah’s Word (i.e., Allah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism) be superior, is in Allah’s Cause.”

Sunan An-Nasa’i 3099—It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet said: “Whoever dies without having fought or having thought of fighting, he dies on one of the branches of hypocrisy.”

Sunan Ibn Majah 2763—It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah said: “Whoever meets Allah with no mark on him (as a result of fighting) in His cause, he will meet Him with a deficiency.”

Sunan Ibn Majah 2794—It was narrated that Amr bin Abasah said: “I came to the Prophet and said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, which Jihad is best?’ He said: ‘(That of a man) whose blood is shed and his horse is wounded.’”

Qur’an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Qur’an 47:35—Be not weary and fainthearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost: for Allah is with you, and will never put you in loss for your (good) deeds.

Also, if Islam promotes harmony with people of other religions, why did Muhammad say in Sahih Muslim 4366, “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims”?

IslamicFront said...

wow david you have hit me with a bucket load here. Give me a few days and i may have a answer for you..

im the mean time can you answer me these questions.

david do you believe that dead people walked through jerusalem.

like the bible says in Matthew 27: 50-53:
Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. 51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent; 52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many..
do you believe this realy happend..

and also what do you do with these bible verses

“Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.”
~1 Timothy 2:11-12
“Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says.”
~1 Corinthians 14:34
thanks

David Wood said...

Oh boy. Classic move.

(1) I do a post on hate messages in Dearborn.
(2) You claim that Islam promotes peace.
(3) I provide a number of passages proving otherwise.
(4) You change the subject to women in Christianity!

You'll have to wait for another post, one where the issues you've raised fit in a bit better.

IslamicFront said...

david wood i said. or didnt you read clearly i said i will try to answer you. i believe muslims have to repeat them selfs several times with you. may be this time you will get it

I WILL TRY TO ANSWER YOU.
I WILL TRY TO ANSWER YOU.
I WILL TRY TO ANSWER YOU.

geting it now.

well we are talking about what we do with verses. so i asked you what you do with the passages i posted. i have asked many christians but got no answer. thats why i thought you will be the person to ask.

if you dont wont to answer thats fine.

IslamicFront said...

david most of your passages you said have been answerd here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iU5mes6ls_E&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rjrfo8quomU&feature=channel_page

thanks to ozzycda

minoria said...

Regarding Matthew 27:50-53 some people see it as symbolical,like William Craig,one of the most famous Christian debaters.Other great debaters are Gary Habermas (he is really good,better than Shabir Ally).He doesn't zigzag like Shabir Ally.Habermas has said that if later the evidence is against Christianity he would leave it.Michael Licona is great too.He wrote Paul Meets Mohammed.It's an imaginary debate about the resurrection between the 2.

I incline to think it was actual.Ignatius of Antioch in his Letter to the Magnesians, 9.2,(around 110 AD) wrote of prophets raised by Jesus.Quadratus around 125 AD wrote a defense of Christianity(now lost)but Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History quoted from him.Quadratus wrote of resurrected people who existed for some time,and some even still lived.It seems they were referring to Matt 27:50-53.

About 1 Tim 2:11-12 and 1 Cor 14:34 there is a long expanation and an ultra-short one.In essence they refer to local situations in the churches.They are not universal.The 2 churches were suffering from false teachings that were spreading.Paul 3 times in his letters affirms the Golden Rule.To say he was also against forever and ever having a woman speak in church would mean he was contradicting himself.To rightly interpret a thinker's position one has to use his clear verses to figure out what his less clear ones meant.

Also in Jewish history twice women ruled the country,had authority over men:Deborah the Judge and Queen Salome Alexandra(1st century BC).Paul knew it 100%.So "a woman can't have authority over a man" as a universal order went against Jewish tradition.

nma said...

IslamicFront said...
david do you believe that dead people walked through jerusalem.

Though the question is for Dr.Wood, what is wrong with dead people walking through Jerusalem in the context of Bible? Why do you think it did not happen?

Also, 1 Timothy 2:11-12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34, means it is only ideal for women to behave so. Paul did not suggest any punishment for women who don’t do so. What is wrong with all these passages?

Please express yourself clearly and fully, instead of asking questions after questions because it looks like that is what you are going to do, a usual Muslim game.

IslamicFront said...

to minoria

thanks minoria for your answer.

The Luddites said...

In regard to the verses in Corinthians which appear to proscribe women from authority, I always wonder about the letter to which Paul is replying, and given the lack of punctuation in the original manuscripts, whether he is actually deriding the Corinthians on their practices, not advocating they follow those instructions. Paul is quite happy to give Priscilla kudos as a "fellow worker in Christ". No mention of being subordinate there.

IslamicFront said...

to nma

and david wood if he wishes to answer.

nma said

what is wrong with dead people
walking through Jerusalem in the context of Bible? Why do you think it did not happen?

my responce

ok lets just say it did happen. How come its only recorded in the bible
and no were else. i mean dead people walking through Jerusalem it would have
been big news. Some one else accept from the bible would have wote something down.

What if dead people walked through your street to day. the news will be everywhere.

You seem to believe it realy happened. when there is no historical evidence of it anywhere accpet
from the bible.

Now i know what you may say.

well there is no historical evidence for jesus not dying on the cross. so why are you attacking
the bible on not given historical evidence on dead people walking.

my point is if david attacks muslms on not given evidence on jesus not dying on the cross. we muslim
can through the same argument back at you.

1. You believe dead people walked. without any evidence.
2. You attack muslims on not given evidence on jesus not dying on the cross
3. What is wrong in believeing in something without any evidence. accouding yo you.
4. So you cant attack muslims on not given evidence. when yourself believe in something
without any evidence yourselfs


i hope i have made my opinion clear...

nma said

Also, 1 Timothy 2:11-12 and 1 Corinthians 14:34, means it is only ideal for women to
behave so. Paul did not suggest any punishment for women who don’t do so. What is wrong with all these passages?

my responce

first of all you do admit woman should be silent in the churches. because you claim theres nothing wrong with the passages
there for you believe in them..

(so does that mean Mary Jo has broken the rules of the bible when she debated in the church lol)

You may believe there is nothing wrong but it creates a problem. What if the high priest says something
against women. anit a woman allowed to speak out against it in the chruch. and what if a woman go's crazy in chruch
do you let here be and let here disturb the people in the church. ect ect. because you said there is no punishment
if a women dont keep silent. so you will have to let here be. so many problems pop up.


(im just pointing out some double standards in some christian arguments)

please note

please dont get me wrong im not attacking the christians its just that many christains pm me saying islam is this and that
but when i reply with these questions i get no answer or 10 different answers.

i answer all there questions. ref them to books and videos on youtube covering there questions. when i do they insulit me.
may be the holy spirit they claim that they have is guiding them to insult me.

and i dont believe its the real true holy spirit. that is guiding them. but the spirit of satan

thanks. i just wont these questons answered. when they have been answered i will speak if it no more
please dont give me 10 differnt answers. i wont answer you all agree on.

thanks

may allah be with you

minoria said...

Hello Luddites:

You're right about the punctuation detail.In the NT copies it is like this:

heisgoingtothestoreandhegontinafewdaysbeforehehadspokentohismother

No punctuation,no spacing.

So 1 Cor 14:31-38 can be:"For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.

As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.....
let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the "Lord's command". If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored."

Where we have:"For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.
As in all the congregations of the saints,women should be silent in the churches..."

Or it can be:"For God is not a God of disorder but of peace as in all the congregations of the saints.Women should be silent in the churches..."

Where is the emphasis?It's on "disorder in the church".I suggest all read the whole letter of 1 Cor and you will notice Paul several times talks of problems there.

What about "what I am writing to you is the Lord's command"?Is it on measures against disorder or " women keep silent in all the churches"?It's on the first.

The most logical way to put the puctuation is the second way,because the other churches in general didn't have the scandals the Corinth church did,otherwise it becomes a universal law:"As in all the congregations of the saints women should be silent in the churches".

Again read all 1 Cor and you will see Paul accepts the idea of women prophesyzing in the same Corinth church.Paul was Jewish.In Judaism the nabi or "prophet" is not someone who foretells the future.He can,but not always.He is essentially a "messenger",telling others the truth about God,his message.

So taking all into consideration the logical choice is option 2.I had also mentioned Deborah and Queen Alexandra Salome(1st century BC).They ruled over both men and women.Was their authority rejected by the Jewish priests?No,in both cases it was accepted willingly.Both were respected by the religious authorities as pious and competent women.Again,Paul knew this.Alexandra Salome had ruled only 100 years before him.He wasn't going to go against what was acceptable in Jewish tradition.

So there are only 2 answers or options,not more,like 10.There are books that show that in the first centuries there were women priests and even bishops.It's a fact.True,later the idea of " a woman can't be a priest" appeared.And that triumphed.But now the Anglican,Lutheran and Pentecostal churches have seen the facts and they have women ministers and priests.

IslamicFront said...

thanks for allowing me to comment takecare and goodbye.

IslamicFront said...

to david wood

if you wont answers to all the passages you sent me plesse pm them all to my friends youtube address he will answer them for you.

http://www.youtube.com/user/muhaddithORG

thanks

nma said...

IslamicFront ,

Part I

Thank you for dealing with the matter here instead of pointing to some external reference and writing your views clearly.

You said:ok lets just say it did happen. How come its only recorded in the bible and no were else. i mean dead people walking through Jerusalem it would have
been big news. Some one else accept from the bible would have wote something down. What if dead people walked through your street to day. the news will be everywhere.


I believe it really happened. Your argument against dead people appearing to many in Jerusalem is not valid because of the following reasons (there could be more):

1) Even if it was big news, it is wrong to assume that someone except the Gospel writers would have been written it down. For example, Jesus did all those miracles etc. but the only TRUE record of Jesus’ life is the Bible. As far as I know, apparently nobody other than the writers of the Gospel bothered to record the series of events involving Jesus. Jesus raised people from the dead but nobody except the writers of the Gospels recorded such events. Jesus performed numerous other miracles, but nobody except the writers of the Gospels recorded such events.

2) People won’t easily believe if someone tells them that a dead person appeared to him or her so they won’t write that down. Also, maybe the people to whom the dead appeared were all illiterate or maybe those who were literate were not good writers.

3) Even if someone other than the writers of the Gospel the recorded those events, it is possible that their writings did not survive.

4) If such things did not happen, it means the writers of the Gospels were lying. Why should people who stood up for truth and justice lie? Even better, why should they give up their lives for things they knew were lies?

You said: You seem to believe it realy happened. when there is no historical evidence of it anywhere accept from the bible.
Now i know what you may say.
well there is no historical evidence for jesus not dying on the cross.


Nope. This is what I would ask: What is the historical evidence of it was Allah (God) who gave the Quran to Mohammed ? what is the historical evidence of Jibreel appearing to Mohammed? And why do you believe Mohammed is Allah’s prophet without credible evidence?

Okay, I got your point. Your argument is, 'why do Christians believe in something without evidence but still need evidence from Muslims when they question certain Christian beliefs'. I will try to answer that later.

nma said...

IslamicFront,

Part II

You said: (so does that mean Mary Jo has broken the rules of the bible when she debated in the church lol)

You made a big mistake here, LOL. Here the ‘Church’ does not mean the church building, but the congregation. So Mary Jo has not broken any rules of the Bible when she debated in the Church building.

You may believe there is nothing wrong but it creates a problem. What if the high priest says something against women. anit a woman allowed to speak out against it in the chruch. and what if a woman go's crazy in church do you let here be and let here disturb the people in the church. ect ect. because you said there is no punishment if a women dont keep silent. so you will have to let here be. so many problems pop up.
(im just pointing out some double standards in some christian arguments)



Unfortunately, your arguments do not make much sense. Also, there are no problems in the examples you have given. If the high priest unjustly punishes a woman for speaking against him, it reflects on him, not on Apostle Paul though I don’t know who this high priest is. If a woman goes crazy in in a church, she may be restrained but not punished. Also like I ponted out earlier, what Apostle Paul wrote in this context are not rules, but suggestions. So there are no double standards in these arguments.

You said: may allah be with you

When you mix the Arabic word ‘Allah’ with English instead of using the word ‘God’, it suggests that Allah is different from God!

nma said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
nma said...

IslamicFront wrote...

but when i reply with these questions i get no answer or 10 different answers.


Muslims give 18 different answers to the same question. For examples, if you ask 10 Muslims about Mohammed's relationship with Ayesha, you get 18 different answers for the same question. Why 18? Because one Muslim contradicts himself.

IslamicFront wrote:and i dont believe its the real true holy spirit. that is guiding them. but the spirit of satan

Sorry, but I believe the spirit called Satan guided Mohammed the so called prophet. The same spirit guides Muslims too.

Sepher Shalom said...

IslamicFront said: "and i dont believe its the real true holy spirit. that is guiding them. but the spirit of satan"

Please be very careful with that line of comment. According to Yeshua, blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the one unforgivable sin. I'm not saying you just did that, but you seem to be moving into that general area, and it would be negligent of me not to warn you.

nma said...

IslamicFront wrote:

my point is if david attacks muslms on not given evidence on jesus not dying on the cross. we muslim can through the same argument back at you.
...
...



Here you are dealing with two different things. One is something that is not said in a debate and the other is something that is said in a debate. Despite someone's beliefs, if someone presents an assertion or negates others' arguments in a debate, he or she need to support the assertion or the negation with evidence, otherwise it will be mere words. And the debate in question was not about dead people appearing in Jerusalem.

As for the Crucifixion, there were witnesses to the Crucifixion. The Gospels are the accounts of those witnesses so they are good enough evidence, assuming people would not lie for no reason and die for what they knew was a lie. But the Quran is written about 600 years after the Crucifixion and it negates the eyewitness accounts without any real knowledge of the events during the Crucifixion.

minoria said...

Here I will give 3 reliable sources on my affirmation that in the first centuries there were women priests.It is very strong support of the option that Paul was talking about a purely local situation.It's by scholars,to be found in Amazon.com:

1.When Women were Priests:Women's Leadership in the Early Church and the Scandal of their Subordination,by Karen Torjesen:it stops at 600 AD.

2.The Hidden History of Women's Ordination:Female Clergy in the Medieval West,by Gary Macy:it goes to the 13th century and limits itself to the western part of Europe.It shows 5 undeniable references to women bishops,one being in Italy in the 9th century.Another is St.Brigid of Ireland.And numerous references to women presbyters legally ordained by bishops(er...or in our terminology "priests")

3.Ordained Women in the Early Church:A Documentary History,by Kevin Madigan and Carolyn Osiek:it contains all the evidence on the subject.

Fernando said...

brothher minorie: manie thankes for those historical information off women beibg preiestes... I knew some off them were ordained diacones in ancient times, and thate some abadesses in medieval times were "considered as" bishopps due to the matriarcal sistem off some countries and thate, indeed, some ladies performed sacerdottal functions in western medieval europe, buut I nebar read those books... tahnkes!!!

minoria said...

Your welcome Fernando,it always good to know a bit more.I think many Christians don't know much about these questions.It's vital t know them.

crash420 said...

as a disabeld vet that seved my country to keep our right free i have but one thing to say
[I LOVE MY COUNTRY BUT FEAR MY GOVERNMENT]