Sunday, October 18, 2009

Geert Wilders Said it Best

From Geert Wilders on October 16th, 2009:

I have a problem with the Islamization of our societies. I have nothing against people, not individuals, not groups. I have nothing against Muslims. I know the majority of Muslims in our society are law abiding people, and there’s nothing wrong with that. I have a problem with the Islamic ideology, the Islamic culture, because I believe the more Islam we get in our free societies, the less freedom we will get. And I want to fight for what the Muslims call “kafirs”, all those non-Muslims, all those women, all those apostates, all those renegades, all those homosexuals that will pay a high price when Islam would become more dominant in our society.

77 comments:

Krishnaraj said...

{How can God (righteous judge) to forgive a person guilty, deserving of punishment?}

But you tell us how can a just judge kill an innocent person for the sins committed by others???
Also plz tell us how did Jesus tell some people that their sins are forgiven even before his 'death on cross' ?

Semper Paratus said...

Krishnaraj,

The topic is what Geert Wilders said. So, to answer you in a way relevant to the topic, Christians have the right to believe and say, "God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life."

Confident Christianity said...

Krishnaraj,

Both of your questions deal with Christian theology. They are good theology questions. However, if you do not believe that 1) Jesus was God and 2) that man is sinful, then you really need to go back and treat those subjects first before continuing with this line of questioning of Christian theology.

First question:
If a man is steeped in his own sinful life and dies in that sin, then how is it that he pays for the sins of others? He has only paid for his own sins with his own death.

Also, Jesus, in Christianity, is not just some innocent, arbitrary man. First, there is no such thing as an "innocent man" in Christian theology. Second, the only exception to this rule is Jesus Christ, who is fully man and fully God. He is the sacrifice. God did for man what man could not, in essence, do for himself.

Further, Hebrews 9:22 states, "Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins."

Why is this?
Leviticus 17:11, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life."

Second question:
Christ's sacrifice was once for all mankind. Hebrews 10:11-14, "And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified."

The sacrifice of Jesus, in Christian theology, was once for all sins (past, present, and future). Jesus, according to Christianity, is God and so he knows his sacrifice in advance of the actual event and is able to forgive based on the reality of the forthcoming event. Jesus, as God (not as just a man), is able to forgive on the basis of the event of his once-for-all sacrifice for all of mankind.

Romans 3:21-26 also explains the once-for-all sacrifice, "But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it—the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

If you do not believe Jesus was God, then it would appear as though God just killed an arbitrary man for the sins of others. (A man who wouldn't have the resources to justify sins, as I mentioned previously). By the way, remember that these questions are formulated inside of basic Christian doctrinal knowledge. They go hand-in-hand with other doctrines of the Christian faith. The questions are moot if man is not sinful, if Jesus was not raised from the dead, and if there is no such person as Jesus, right? Just checking with ya.

Thanks,
MJ

ashraf said...

it seems that he is an another amature scholar against islam. In the history we have seen many geert wilders, I"ll pray the god almighty to give him Hidhaya and right path.

Adam said...

Dear Ashraf Bhai,

Thank you for your thoughts. Once again I want to inform you Our holy scriptures Describes on the other hand your Quran Prescribes.
I like the honesty of the Bible which records such incidents and condemns it as Sin. So that the readers understand this act is sinful. Hence our children, families, our mother or sisters have any problem or shame to read it. To this you said “i believe this is the reason it reflects in your (christians) lifestyle in the west.” First I’ll like to tell you. Western World does not represent Christianity. Form the very beginning We Indian and Pakistani Christians don’t identify with the west, though we are falsely accused as western agents by Islamic and Hindu extremists. Any ways, I have met many Westerners Who had biblical names but not interested in Christianity and I also met westerner with deep Christian belief and values.

Now coming back to Islamic lifestyle, hear in India every third Rapist is a muslim, Muslims are involved in all kind of Crimes eg: Drug peddlers, Drug mafia, terrorist, Contract Killers, Human trafficking, Extortion, import and export of illegal substance, Forced prostitution especially of Bangladeshi muslim girls etc etc…

You said “i have same type of stories of your priests,pastors,bishops ans reverends all over the world.”
I too have many stories in India of Catholic priests molesting choir girls, altar boys, Pastors have extra martial affair, Priest having sexual relationships with Nuns. To such incidents We Church Parishners condemn it and also take action against such people. But I also have many such stories of Hafizs (Islamic teachers) Madarassa (Islamic schools) molesting children in India. The sad part is these men walk freely or made to marry.
If you encounter such people (Christians), if we ask them if they inspired by Holy Spirit. These men and women, would put their head down with shame. On the other hand Muslim sinners use their Quran and Mullas to defend themselves. Even in the secular court of Law.

You said: “you are showing individual mistakes of muslims”
Whatever I had highlighted, seem to be an individual mistakes of muslims. But these individual muslim live freely in our society. Because islam supports them. Hence these criminal acts (acc to court of Law) or sinful acts (acc to Christianity) are supported by muslim community. Warning non muslim not to interfere in your religious matters.

This what our Bible say about the so called holy people : “Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly (James 3:1)”.

Simon said...

i just want to make 1 thing clear to all. im not part of any christian denomination. although i do belong to a pentacostal church. i only believe in the bible and its true meaning. i just want to let muslims knw that the argues and debates r based on the tru meaning of God. Jesus in the NT. not any denominations catholics, 7 day,johavah witness etc. they all have different meanings about the bible. i knw this has nothng to do with this topic but i just had to say this.

IslamSINS said...

Krishnaraj, you seem to lose focus (not uncommon for a Muslim). But, in Islam, the concept of substitutionary payment exiists, so please go read Sahih Muslim book 37.6665, 6666, 6668. Islam also has a concept of original sin so, again, please go study your books. What grade are you in?

But, to the topic, . . . Geert expresses the opinion of many of us. There are some wonderful Muslims, some "moderate" Muslims. There is no wonderful or moderate Islam, and therein lies the problem. The books of Islam teach such debasement, violence, misogyny, and hatred, and Muslims are the primary and most devastated victims of Islam. As the peace-loving Germans under Hitler were totally irrelevant, so are any peaceful Muslims. Islam is a cult of hatred and death. It is the faithful Muslims, who follow the teachings of Muhammad's hatred and ignorance which pose the threat. Allah clearly commands the subjection of our planet until none have a right to be worshipped but him. The true God gives us a choice, telling us to choose whom we will serve. Allah is NOT God, but an opposing entity to YHWH and humanity.

minoria said...

I would like to add a bit more.Non-Muslims who know little of the situation in the Muslim world often fall for the idea that there is a "demonization of Muslims."

DEMONIZATION OF BLACKS AND JEWS

Demonization is:"to say FALSE NEGATIVE ideas about a group".

Like in the 1930's with the demonization of Jews in Germany with the slogan "The Jews are our Misfortune!".

And the idea there that the Jews were responsible for a "stab in the back" that prevented Germany from winning WW I.No responsible scholar accepts such views.

The same for the negative ideas about black people in the US South in the Segregation Era of 1880-1970.

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE

Those non-Muslims who fall for that just don't know that UNLIKE the Jews in the 1930's there are:

1. Muslim organizations in the West and elsewhere that actively want to impose an anti- human rights system on us.
2.That the majority of Muslims agree to discrimination against us:what differs is the DEGREE of discrimination only.

All of this is not "made-up","a fantasy","a crazy dream".

THE US SOUTH

In the days of segregation (1880-1970)no intelligent person would deny that MOST WHITE people there were in favor of discriminating black people.Nobody would have said:"Demonization of WHITE SOUTHERNERS".

Krishnaraj said...

Sam says that Muhammad does not meet the criteria of Deutronomy

Muhammad did not meet either of the criteria

(1) Muhammad never knew Allah face to face...he recieved revelations through Gabriel

(2)He did not perform miracles.....the quran clearly shows many instances when Muhammad was asked to perfom them...but he did not.

So according to the book of Deutronomy Muhammad is a false Prophet and hence is book Quran becomes false too.

PROOVE JHON THE BAPTIST IS PROPHET OF GOD FROM BIBLE,

WHAT MIRACLE HE HAS PERFORMED.

WHEN HE TALKED WITH GOD FACE TO FACE SHOW FROM BIBLE?

WHAT IS THE CRITERIA FOR PROPHETHOOD FROM BIBLE?
WHAT MIRACLE DOES PROPHET ABRAHAM HAS PERFORMED IN BIBLE?



The verse Deuteronomy 34:10-11 does not say anything about the prophet knowing God face to face but it says about God knowing the prophet face to face. The NT verse, John 1:18 say, No man hath seen God at any time the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father he hath declared him. The word declared is translated from the Greek word, exēgēsato which really means explained. So the verse means, No one has seen God but Jesus has explained him and made him known! Moreover Deuteronomy 34:10-11 clearly says that no prophet like Moses has ever risen in Israel. The whole OT is said to have been approved by Jesus. Then how can you say that this part of the prophecy is not true?

As for miracles Muhammad pbuh has also performed some minor miracles. but his greatest miracle is tyhe Quran which is free from all contradictions and errors and which exists without anyone tampering it. All the rest of the prophets were sent only to a limited time and for a specific people only. That is why their miracles were visible only to those people to whom their messages were pertinent. But Muhammad PBUH was sent to the whole world. That is why his miracle that is Quran still exists as it was revealed to him so that all the people ill the end of days can inspect it and realize the truth.

As a context to this let me tell what the NT tells also. To the scribes and pharisees of Israel who asked Jesus for a sign, he answered and said unto them An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign and there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of the prophet Jonas, for as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly "so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth Matthew 12:38. According to NT this was the only sign given by Jesus.

Krishnaraj said...

As I wrote earlier, there were many reasons for marriages of prophet Muhammad. First of all it was revealed to him by Almighty God himself that he was going to marry Aysha RA, in a dream. Since Aysha was a very intelligent and capable girl and since she lived long after the death of Muhammad PBUH , to narrate the hadiths of prophet she learnt from him directly as a result of living with him, to his followers, this marriage was a divine plan of God. The reason why Abubakr hesitated to give off his daughter in marriage though he wanted to do that, was because there was a strange custom among the Arabs which prevented them from marrying off their daughter to those who they called their brothers though they were not actual brothers. This was what made abubakr hesitate too. as muhammad pbuh was their religious leader it was he who had to enlighten then as to its fallacy. Hence the hadith of Sahih Bukhari 7.18 which you mentioned.

Simon said...

krishnaraj

i never heard of anyone forcing someone to convert to islam or they will be killed for it. explain me that first? second explain how mohammad can be a prophet based on his teaching and his actions. i do agree with muslims on 1 thing and that is that they do follow the quran. u knw raping killing suicide bombing terroist attacks. u knw all the filth that quran teaches before getting heavenly virgins. answer me y the things that muslims do to upset the wrold?

Paul Guralivu said...

To Krishnaraj:

If this marriage was ment to be for Aisha to actually tell the hadiths, then why didn't Allah showed Muhammad not to have sex with her when she was so little ?

Paul.

Paul Guralivu said...

To Krishnaraj in the matter of Muhammad as being The prophet:

I don't understand why are so many whom don't read the text from Deuteronomy in the context: the immediate context and the way that context was fullfilled by all the prophets after Moses, as Sam explained in the video.

Paul.

WomanForTruth101 said...

//second explain how mohammad can be a prophet based on his teaching and his actions//

Yes. What a wonderful response. Highly christian like. Focusing on the same 5 or so hadiths and COMPLETELY ignoring the thousands of others.
Why did i convert? I found out he was a loving man, who everyone grew to love. He was a gentle and kind man with great character. He was a leader and established equality. He was trustworthy and truthful and honest.
His prophecies and what would happen to the muslim ummah is quite amazing. If your christian. i can understand your confusion.
And if you decide to give me hadiths that challenge what i said, give me ATLEAST 2 hadiths or more to show it is reliable.
If it's anything thats already been taken care of (i.e i noticed some of you stopped writing about Muhammed pbuh marriage with Aisha after muslims responded) then dont bother to bring it up.

David Wood said...

WomanForTruth101: I have absolutely no clue what sources you were reading when you realized that "everyone grew to love" Muhammad, but I'm willing to bet that it was modern sources written by modern Muslims and not the early sources (which paint a far different picture). Keep in mind the fact that Muhammad ultimately died because he was poisoned, and that tons of people left Islam as soon as he died. This doesn't sound like a man everyone loved.

I'm sure those of us here have no problem meeting your request. In fact, maybe I'll do an entire post on it in the next day or two.

I should note that I can't figure out what you mean when you act as if we've been silenced on Aisha. I have about half a dozen videos I'm about to post on that topic.

BTW, do you believe that it's morally acceptable to have sex with a nine-year-old girl?

The Fat Man said...

WomanforTruth said...

"i noticed some of you stopped writing about Muhammed pbuh marriage with Aisha after muslims responded) then dont bother to bring it up."

I can only speak for myself. But I stopped commenting on it becasue whenever I read a muslim justifying what Mohamed did to Aisha, it makes me want to VOMMIT. I'm not joking I get physicaly ILL.
The question is why dont you?

Tell us what flavor of islam do you subscribe to. Please choose one of the following below.

1. Allah chose Aisha for Mohamed at such a young age becasue as a child it has been "Scietificaly Proven" that children absurb things like a spunge. And mohamed needed to teech someone who could absorb his entire Message.

2. That Aisha was actualy older then 9, and that although she was smart and could ubsorb things like a spounge she just wasnt smart enough to know her own age.

3. That this is a perfectly normal thing to do, becasue the age of consent for marrage and sex in islam is after the first Period. This acctualy shows how merciful allah is becasue it prevents pre martial sex and protects the woman from performing ZINA.

4. Finaly are you of the opinion of some muslims who say "Why do you care, her parents didnt mind?"

Womanoftruth do you have a daughter. I once challanged muslim mothers on paltalk that if they gave me their daughters to marry and perform NIKA on after there first period I would convert to islam. The response was "You are a pervert, you are a pedaphile" Funny.

Well now its time to VOMMIT.

minoria said...

Hello Woman for Truth:

Glad to see you back.I have read your blog in general.It says you used to be Christian,like Paul Williams and Seymour.

Regarding your opinion of Mohammed the situation is this:

1.The EARLIEST biography of him is from 120 YEARS after his death,by Ibn Ishaaq.

2.The KORAN has something but not enough.

3.Then we have the hadiths of BUKHARI from 200 YEARS later.

NEGATIVE MATERIAL

Ibn Ishaaq and Bukhari,plus Muslim,have positive material and negative material on Mohammed.Some hadiths have Mohammed doing MIRACLES.

CRITERION OF EMBARASSMENT of the HISTORICAL METHOD

Scholars tend to accept the negative material as having a high probability of being true because they serve no propaganda value.Why invent negative things about him?

Using the same idea they tend to accept as authentic the embarassing parts in the gospels(but not negative really):Jesus being baptized,his family and relatives didn't believe in him as a prophet,Peter denied Jesus 3X,etc.

Those negative parts about Mohammed are hard to justify.Muslims do so and they can be justified if you accept them as a ZEITGEIST (spirit of the time).That means Mohammed didn't know better...he was a product of his environment.

I don't mean to say he had no good qualities(Julius Ceaser and Alex the Great also had good qualities,as well as very bad qualities)but his actions are not such that non-Muslims would put Mohammed as being the EQUAL of Buddha,Jesus,Confucius,Francis of Assisi,ASHOKA(the greatest king who ever lived,Indian king who converted to Buddhism).

PROPHETS IN THE OT AND ZEITGEIST

David,Abraham,Solomon,Jonah and others did things that were not exemplary.They were products of their age,or maybe you can call it original sin.

AYSHA AND THE AGE OF 9:

I have read the Muslim arguments,based on info in a few hadiths,that her age was really 16-18.What is the historian to do?He asks himself:what is MORE PROBABLE:
to make a MISTAKE about a MAJOR event or a MINOR event?

It is about a MINOR one,of course.So a hadith saying Aysha was helping the wounded after a battle refers to a MINOR thing,and it is more likely to suffer from error after 200 YEARS of retelling than a MAJOR detail like the age of consummation of a marriage.I say it because that hadith is one used agaisnt her being 9 when the marriage was consummated.

minoria said...

Hello Woman for Truth:

Glad to see you back.I have read your blog in general.It says you used to be Christian,like Paul Williams and Seymour.

Regarding your opinion of Mohammed the situation is this:

1.The EARLIEST biography of him is from 120 YEARS after his death,by Ibn Ishaaq.

2.The KORAN has something but not enough.

3.Then we have the hadiths of BUKHARI from 200 YEARS later.

NEGATIVE MATERIAL

Ibn Ishaaq and Bukhari,plus Muslim,have positive material and negative material on Mohammed.Some hadiths have Mohammed doing MIRACLES.

CRITERION OF EMBARASSMENT of the HISTORICAL METHOD

Scholars tend to accept the negative material as having a high probability of being true because they serve no propaganda value.Why invent negative things about him?

Using the same idea they tend to accept as authentic the embarassing parts in the gospels(but not negative really):Jesus being baptized,his family and relatives didn't believe in him as a prophet,Peter denied Jesus 3X,etc.

Those negative parts about Mohammed are hard to justify.Muslims do so and they can be justified if you accept them as a ZEITGEIST (spirit of the time).That means Mohammed didn't know better...he was a product of his environment.

I don't mean to say he had no good qualities(Julius Ceaser and Alex the Great also had good qualities,as well as very bad qualities)but his actions are not such that non-Muslims would put Mohammed as being the EQUAL of Buddha,Jesus,Confucius,Francis of Assisi,ASHOKA(the greatest king who ever lived,Indian king who converted to Buddhism).

PROPHETS IN THE OT AND ZEITGEIST

David,Abraham,Solomon,Jonah and others did things that were not exemplary.They were products of their age,or maybe you can call it original sin.

AYSHA AND THE AGE OF 9:

I have read the Muslim arguments,based on info in a few hadiths,that her age was really 16-18.What is the historian to do?He asks himself:what is MORE PROBABLE:
to make a MISTAKE about a MAJOR event or a MINOR event?

It is about a MINOR one,of course.So a hadith saying Aysha was helping the wounded after a battle refers to a MINOR thing,and it is more likely to suffer from error after 200 YEARS of retelling than a MAJOR detail like the age of consummation of a marriage.I say it because that hadith is one used agaisnt her being 9 when the marriage was consummated.

minoria said...

Hello Woman for Truth:

Glad to see you back.I have read your blog in general.It says you used to be Christian,like Paul Williams and Seymour.

Regarding your opinion of Mohammed the situation is this:

1.The EARLIEST biography of him is from 120 YEARS after his death,by Ibn Ishaaq.

2.The KORAN has something but not enough.

3.Then we have the hadiths of BUKHARI from 200 YEARS later.

NEGATIVE MATERIAL

Ibn Ishaaq and Bukhari,plus Muslim,have positive material and negative material on Mohammed.Some hadiths have Mohammed doing MIRACLES.

CRITERION OF EMBARASSMENT of the HISTORICAL METHOD

Scholars tend to accept the negative material as having a high probability of being true because they serve no propaganda value.Why invent negative things about him?

Using the same idea they tend to accept as authentic the embarassing parts in the gospels(but not negative really):Jesus being baptized,his family and relatives didn't believe in him as a prophet,Peter denied Jesus 3X,etc.

Those negative parts about Mohammed are hard to justify.Muslims do so and they can be justified if you accept them as a ZEITGEIST (spirit of the time).That means Mohammed didn't know better...he was a product of his environment.

I don't mean to say he had no good qualities(Julius Ceaser and Alex the Great also had good qualities,as well as very bad qualities)but his actions are not such that non-Muslims would put Mohammed as being the EQUAL of Buddha,Jesus,Confucius,Francis of Assisi,ASHOKA(the greatest king who ever lived,Indian king who converted to Buddhism).

PROPHETS IN THE OT AND ZEITGEIST

David,Abraham,Solomon,Jonah and others did things that were not exemplary.They were products of their age,or maybe you can call it original sin.

AYSHA AND THE AGE OF 9:

I have read the Muslim arguments,based on info in a few hadiths,that her age was really 16-18.What is the historian to do?He asks himself:what is MORE PROBABLE:
to make a MISTAKE about a MAJOR event or a MINOR event?

It is about a MINOR one,of course.So a hadith saying Aysha was helping the wounded after a battle refers to a MINOR thing,and it is more likely to suffer from error after 200 YEARS of retelling than a MAJOR detail like the age of consummation of a marriage.I say it because that hadith is one used agaisnt her being 9 when the marriage was consummated.

The Fat Man said...

All
I just checked out WomanForTruth's Blog. I found it to be more entertaining the Ethshaam Gulams blog.

A few choice quote from her Blog side bar section. She first says

"We here at this blog give you news from all of the holy spirit guided christian activity from around the continent."

She has articles like these below.

Pastor Assults Church Member
Pastor Indicted for Church Bombing
Christian Preecher Raped woman for Disobediance
Dad the Hatefull Pastor
Another Woman Steals from Church
Well you guys get the idea.

Another quote in her side bar.

"Many christians have complained about this site. It is the first muslim site that is critical of the christian faith (though it's done in a respectful way"

Well I'm not complaining I'm just wondering when your actualy goign to be Critical of Christianity.

Oh and just for the record. I think I can speak for every christian on this blog when I say I not only Condem the actions of those in the articles you posted. But I also can un equvicaly state that it was not the HolySpirit that led these people to do these acts. And they are definitly not Christian.

Can you say the same for the Taliban?

Fernando said...

Krishnaraj saide: «but his [muhammad] greatest miracle is tyhe quran which is free from all contradictions and errors and which exists without anyone tampering it»...

whate merit can someone habe just by speakking as a parot from whate he supposedely eard from an Angel?

and aboutte the lack off contradictions in the qur'an that'es just a false assumption you muslimes habe: the qur'an is full off contradictions: internal (the qur'an saying one thing here and another there) and external ones (historical and scientific ones); for the first ones just check itt out in how many days was the earth created; for the second just see iff the semen Yakhruju min bayni alssulbi waalttara-ibi...

Fernando said...

Dear Krishnaraj... I guess you're mixing two things: the possibility off being a prophet and the possibility off being the prophet promissed in Deuteronomy as being "one as Moses"... these are two different aspects...

let's postponne the aspect iff muhammad was a prophet (and I do beliebe he was not) and pay attention to the aspect off iff muhammad was the prophet expected to be like Moses (as muslims claim since Dt 18:18 is speaking off this)...

Dt. 18.18 says: «From their own brothers I shall raise up a prophet like yourself»

two points clearly present here: the prophet will be gadered from their (the israelites) "own brothers" (an israelitte) and thate prophet will be "like yourself (Moses)"...

so: was muhamamd an israelite?

aboutte the second aspect (being like Moses), Dt. 34.10 (as Doctor Wood crearly saide in the video) sais: «Since then, there has never been such a prophet in Israel like Moses, the man whom Yahweh knew face to face»...

so: being a prophet likke Moses (not only being a prophet) implies seeing God face to face... did muhammad did this? no...

did Jesus did this? Jesus, clearly satates the Gospel off Jesus according to John, is the Word off God and in Jo. 1:1 (b) it is saide: «the Word was with God», whic in greek is «o logos en pros ton theon»... the expression en pros usually requieres a dative (tw thew), butt here, surprisingli, we have an accusative (ton theon) which means "towards"...

so: Jo. 1:1 (b) is better translatted as «the Word was towars God», meaning thate the Word from everlasting time was seeing God the Father... thats why Jesus can bee the explainer off God the Father in Jo. 1:18 which sais (agreeing withe Jo. 1:1 (b)) tahte the onlu Son is «directed towards the Father's heart»...

now... aboutte being a prophet... the MAJOR criteria off prophetwood in the Bible is iff the person is an messenger off YHWH, off the God revealed in the Bible... was muhammad a messenger off YHWH? I'll lett you answer this question...

may God blees you Krishnaraj...

ashraf said...

Adam said:
"First I’ll like to tell you. Western World does not represent Christianity"

but western world sponsor christianity,you got paid for your faith.

Adam said:
"Now coming back to Islamic lifestyle, hear in India every third Rapist is a muslim, Muslims are involved in all kind of Crimes eg: Drug peddlers, Drug mafia, terrorist, Contract Killers, Human trafficking, Extortion, import and export of illegal substance, Forced prostitution especially of Bangladeshi muslim girls etc etc…"

again iam telling you adam sahab, culprits are there in every community, since you are a islamophobe it is just your own imagination. by the way Adam sahab can you tell me who are the masters(pioneers) in this field worldwide?
you christians taught this ugly things to the world,can you deny that?

Adam said:
"If you encounter such people (Christians), if we ask them if they inspired by Holy Spirit. These men and women, would put their head down with shame"

until they get caught they used to bluff like you,but once they get caught by police,the holy spirit will run away from them.isn't too funny?

this is what your holly bible talks about you Adam sahab

mathew:7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

so better consult a physchatrist to get rid off the holly sprit brother, i will pray for you desi.

bye.

Fernando said...

ashraf: do you really beliebe thate "western world sponsor christianity"... you must be kidding, righte?

on the other hand there is not an equal separation between muslim world and islam, nad thates a reall problem...

p.s.: your attack on the Holy Spirit was shamefull...

minoria said...

Hello guys:

I don't know why what I wrote was repeated 3X.Sorry about that.I have also read the titles of Woman for truth's blog.I also condemn 100% all the bad actions done by Christians there,like stealing from a church,rape,etc.

BECAUSE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT?

Now she certainly has read the NT.Now who is the Holy Spirit?It is GOD.

What would GOD(er,the Holy Spirit) make people act like?Well PAUL tells us:

GALAT 5:22:"But the FRUIT of the SPIRIT is:

1.Love
2.Joy
3.Peace
4.Patience
5.Kindness
6.Consideration
7.Faith
8.Sweetness
9.Self-control."

My argument is:"To say Christians do bad things because of the Holy Spirit would be more convincing IF the NT did NOT have a DESCRIPTION of what the fruits of the Holy Spirit are."

HOW MANY Muslims know what the "fruits of the Holy Spirit" are?I mean how many know there even is such a description?Practically none.So that is why I write it down here.

Ali said...

Actually WomenForTruth has only done 2-3 posts. I do most of them.
Hey, whats wrong with tracking the christian activity? Your fellow christians have numerous sites on "jihad".
But unfortunatly we dont have a holy spirit guiding us.

I do pretty much all of the editing. I've had this blog for about 7-8 months. It was only a few weeks ago i added answering christianity. I might take it off in the future though.

minoria said...

Ali:

PAUL in ROM 2:14-15 tells us that people can get to know what God wants by themselves.He refers to "the Law".He meant the Golden Rule:"Do to others as you would have others do to you/Love your neighbor like yourself."

In other words atheists and others can without any supernatural aid can come to that conclusion.That would be the essence of what the Holy Spirit,er God,wants us to be like.

What I am saying is that in Christianity we do not say we have a monopoly on goodness(others can be just as good:atheists,agnostics,Hindus,etc).Salvation does not depend on that,but on accepting the gift of salvation from God,er,Jesus.And that he will work in our lives making us better.And there is no law system in the NT to treat non-Christians in a discriminatory way,unlike Sharia law.

WomanForTruth101 said...

Narrated by Ali ibn Abi Talib "All who came close to him grew to love him."

David you said Muhammed pbuh passed away because of poisoning. But strange that poison took 3 YEARS to affect him?? Many say his death was natural.

Also may i have those reliable sources that say MANY left islam after his death?

You also wrote:

"BTW, do you believe that it's morally acceptable to have sex with a nine-year-old girl?"

Today no. Back then when there was no age of consent, when a woman showed signs of maturity and when her physical features began to show, she was ready for marriage. Remember Aisha was engaged to another man but it fell through.
Let me ask you all a simple a question, why is lady Aisha known as the "Mother of Believers"?
Oh and by the way, wasn't the proposal of this marriage an original suggestion by one of Muhammed's pbuh female companions (Khawalh bint Hakim)?

I'm 100% confident that many of your ancestors, married early. My grandma married at 12 to my grandpa who was 23. And I'm not from any tribal area or third world country. This was here, in the west.

There's a hadith about Aisha getting left behind on a trip. Later on some men came to her and asked if she was lost and took her to where everyone else she was with were. Upon arrival one of the men claimed he had an affair with Aisha. She denied all accusations made by the man. Why did that man make that claim?

WomanForTruth101 said...

"Can you say the same for the Taliban?"

Dear Fatman,

I noticed that Fernando claimed the taliban were true examples of islam when Ali proved they were not. There's many christians, especially on Jihadwatch, who take the same ideology as Fernando. And they'll dismiss with ignorance (especially the self assured scholor Robert Spencer) the voices of muslims, who actually know islam.
Fatman i bet there's many on here as well who are going to disagree with your statement on the Taliban.

And for Adam, who wrote:
"If you encounter such people (Christians), if we ask them if they inspired by Holy Spirit. These men and women, would put their head down with shame. On the other hand Muslim sinners use their Quran and Mullas to defend themselves. Even in the secular court of Law."

Okay so with the list of events that imaams do in india, that you claim would justify their actions in accordance to islam, may you give me islamic scriptures to support those claims? You said the muslim "sinners" (people, in this context, who go AGAINST islamic teachings) would have their actions justified by islam?
If you visit well known muslim sites, like islamonline, islam-qa etc, you will see scholars condemning all terror and vile acts.

Brianman said...

Christians, let me give you personal reasons why I don't believe in your religion, although I am still open to all religions:

Jesus’ actual teachings and actions:

Luke 22:
39 Jesus went out as usual to the Mount of Olives, and his disciples followed him. 
40 On reaching the place, he said to them, "Pray that you will not fall into temptation." 
41 He withdrew about a stone's throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed

It just seems a bit strange to say that Jesus as God as a human being is tempted to/vulnerable to make little sins, and he needs to pray that so he does not fall into these little or big sins. Christians may say “Yes, but Jesus as God was sent down as a human body, a human just like us, we are all inclined to sin” But the thing is, Christians believe that his spirit is Holy, He is supposed to be God here. Does God really fall into the sin of the devil rather than preserve and stick to His own word that he had at the time of Adam? Christians believe Jesus is the Word God manifest in the flesh. So this comes to show that God's spirit is not powerful enough to overcome the sins when he is in Human form. So, given the same test as us...HE IS VULNERABLE, A BEING VULNERABLE TO SIN, like us humans. His spirit is no stronger than ours to stop us feeling vulnerable.

Humans make sins. If Jesus is God in the form of man, then this human Jesus would not make a single sin because of the fact that Jesus' is God's spirit. The Holy spirit acts as a spirit strengthening agent for all people that stops them from sinning and even being tempted, and God is all powerful, this is strange because this Christian God in human form is scared that he may fall into sin because he is worried he may be tempted by the devil? God is stronger than the devil, but now because He is a human, He is weaker than the devil? The Holy Spirit stops man from sin, and makes man full of happiness and confidence not to sin, as well as the Will not to sin, i.e some men are not tempted by money, women etc. due to their faith (due to strenghtning effect caused by Holy Spirit, they are able to create effective plans to avoid sin and programme their minds so they are no longer tempted, or just never tempted, But God as we all believe is stronger the than everything. Surely God being the supposable Holy Spirit too according to Christians should be free from temptation and fear of temptation to sin ? God's power is stronger than the power of any sort of temptation to sin. God inside a human being makes the human being self-sufficient.

Why will Jesus fear God and pray that he does not fall into temptations (which includes in private) when God himself is not even going to be judged?

(Sure It makes sense if Jesus was to praise God all the time. I'd also like to add that God is self-sufficient (A judeo-christian belief), God doesn’t praise himself/So "A PART OF HIM" DOES NOT PRAISE HIMSELF, especially out of fear of sin (submitting to the devils temptation)....But an element "a person of the three" prays! This very idea is just strange to me personally, maybe to you too.

I hope you understand what i mean here i.e a spirit filled with the goodness of the holy spirit makes someone hate the sin to the extent that they won't even do the sin. Christians believe that Jesus' body is filled with the Holy spirit (I think all believers in Jesus i.e bahai, Islam etc. believe that too). So Jesus should never feel the need to pray OUT OF FEAR of falling into temptation because the power of the holy spirit which is in him is so strong that he will never worry about falling into temptation.


Ok, that is one reason.

I will give you other reasons why later. I want to hear a Christian response.

Please understand Christian Scholars, that I am not being angry or speaking in a patronising way. I respect your belief and it could be that I consider it myself.

My intro:
I am 18 years old.
From UK.
Gap year - spiritual Journey
Going to study at top 4 uni in uk

Fernando said...

WomanForTruth101 said: «I noticed that Fernando claimed the taliban were true examples of islam when Ali proved they were not»...

sorry... he did no such thing... iff you beliebe in such things please ask your friend Ali to do the same... just some questions for you WomanForTruth101:

1) do these Taliban folow the 5 pilars off islam?

2) do they folow sharia law interpreted according to the major scools off islamic jurisprudence?

3) are they allowed to do the hajj?

hummm...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman... glad you asked your questions... lets see...

1) Luke 22:
39ff: «Jesus went out as usual to the Mount of Olives, and his disciples followed him. On reaching the place, he said to them, "Pray that you will not fall into temptation." 
He withdrew about a stone's throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed»...

where is, in your opinion, the smallest hint thate Jesus sinned / felt into temptation? By the way: did you ever read Hebrews 4:15?

(take noptice: one thing is being tempted and another is following into temptation: iff I see, in a beach, an enourmously cute blond girl in a small bikini I'm tempted, butt I'll only fell into temptation iff I give my assent to thate temptation... and defnetely I'll nott want her to be killed or flogged... she's free to be dreasses as she likes...)

2) you also saide: «Why will Jesus fear God and pray that he does not fall into temptations (which includes in private) when God himself is not even going to be judged?»... Iff:

a) the "fear off God" is, in the Bible, an absolutelly human perception in front off the Holyness of God;

b) in the Bible the jews (as Jesus) prayied to God;

woulde Jesus in his natural dimention not experience the fear off God and not pray to God? woulde God be an atheist?

ah... now I see whate you mean: you think Jesus prayied to be avoied off temptation... not to be tempted... no He did not (can you show us otherwise?)... He prayed, in is 100% human dimention, to God the Father so thate he shoulde Have not to suffer the cruel dead He knew He was going to experience: «'Father,' he said, 'if you are willing, take this cup away from me. Nevertheless, let your will be done, not mine.'» (Lk 22:42)... the "cup" He's reffering to is not the temptation (He "had" to be tempted), rather His dead..

Anothe point: The Holy Spirit is not an overcoming force thate obliterates the human dimention: not eben in Jesus case: the power off God, off the God off the Bible, is nott a despotic and violent one: its "the power off love" (not the Huey Lewis song... loool...), and love respects always the nature off the other... The presence off the Holy Spirit in Jesus did not make him less human, less proned to the consequences off having an human dimention...

about Jesus speaking to God... lets try small steeps:

1) Jesus is 100% God and 100% human...;

2) His Godly dimention dwelled in his human one;

3) therefore His Godly dimention was limited (freely limited... a limitation accepted for love off humanity) to His human dimention: He could nott have a spear into His heart without dying humanly for example...

4) His human dimention operated His conscience and therefore He, in His human dimention, prayed... not to Him (not to His Godly dimention), butt to God the Father who's a ditent "upostasis" (the tecnhical word thate we, erronously, translate using the word "person")

Dear Brianman... glad to see you wantting to putt your questions forward... lets keep them comming... butt remember: use this blogg also to question the muslim faith... I'm sure the muslim people around here will be also glad to answer your questions: this is, after all, "answering muslims"...

may God help you in your search off the truth...

ashraf said...

Hi kabaayaan fernando, pare you asked some questions about Taliban. do you know who created taliban? U.S and british goverments trained them to fight against USSR. What about Bin Laden, who created him as world Dhadha?( Ask adam what dhadha) it is you christians reason for all the problems of the world not only today through out history. but,you christians are very ill-clever to put the blame on others.

kabaayan please sit and read political history pari, then you may realize the atrocities done by your holy spritted born agains.

don't raise childish questions about Taliban, Al qaeda hereafter.

Fernando said...

Hey WomanForTruth101...

How are you? Well, I hope...

Just to remember (and let's see iff your friend Ali will try to deni, as he did in the past, aour exchange off words)you: you said: «I noticed that Fernando claimed the taliban were true examples of islam when Ali proved they were not»...

sorry... he did no such thing... iff you beliebe in such things please ask your friend Ali to do the same here...

just some questions for you WomanForTruth101:

1) do these Taliban folow the 5 pilars off islam?

2) do they folow sharia law interpreted according to the major scools off islamic jurisprudence?

3) are they allowed to do the hajj?

hummm...

Fernando said...

Hi ashraf...

no: the USA finenced the mujahedeen butt the taliban were finaced by the comunist and atheistic countries like USSR and China to defeet the priours... it looks thate is you thate need to lear your history...

butt eben iff the taliban were finaced by the USA, which is nott the case, they were not financed to do whate they did after the USSR was fefeated in Apheganistan... that happened due to the islamic ideology in itself... ;-)

Brianman said...

Thank you Fernando, I sincerely respect your scholarly expertise.
Firstly, to Muslims:
A commentator of the Qur'an said the Word of God (which is referred as Jesus) is "Be - and it is" or something like that...I currently have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER as to where the commentator got that belief from other than a simple assumption, where is the evidence to back up their claim?

Now...

Of course, looking at this very quote that I sent (that is a quote from the bible), Jesus was not tempted, be prayed that he will not fall into temptation.....
But even so, you wouldn't pray specifically to avoid temptation unless you know that it is possible that you may fall into it.

I'll give an example: When I get married and have a child, and when my child turns into an adult, I won't have to pray to fall into temptation by the 'beauty' of my child because the child will be my child, I will have my own wife, it is absolutely sick etc etc. I have not been taught to think it is wrong...the whole point of evil temptation is that your mind bends the rules of 'good' to dwell in bad. But the good thoughts that I possess in this context is coming from the strengthening effect of the Holy Spirit, it is the holy spirit that initiates the good voice in my conscience to overpower the bad, and the bad does not exist in my mind. Therefore, I do not have to pray that I don't fall into temptation where the Holy Spirit and the angels has guarded me. Holy Spirit has given me an idea of what is good, bad etc.

Brianman said...

Furthermore, although this is just one mere (sick) example, I want to emphasise that according to the Bible, Jesus' spirit is God's spirit, Jesus was born of the Holy Spirit, so there is a special God spirit inside Jesus - What my point here is is that the Holy Spirit stops and convinces someone that they won't even think of a particular sin, it is 'sick', they are so repulsed that they don't even need to pray to avoid the 'risk' of falling into temptation to commit that sin. Likewise, the spirit of God in Jesus, so any sin will be detested, and God in a human body will not even hold the fear/uncertainty that they may fall into temptation, despite the idea of Jesus being 100% man and 100% human, God's power not to sin is stronger than humans fear over uncertainty over the future and fear, as well as the inclination to sin - it's an irrefutable fact. Externally, God as a human has no strength, because it depends on physique etc. but internally, there will be no fear...so there won't even be any fear or hurt over the will of God.
Sorry if my text isn't very fluent/doesn't make sense. I need to fix up because I'm going to medical school next year...Patients won't understand me very well (I'm half Polish) - that's my excuse ;)

Because i now the Holy Spirit has given me the strength to say no to certain 'temptations', although I am vulnerable to 'temptations', as was Jesus. But Jesus with a spirit of God can never even be vulnerable, nor shall he grieve or worry about 'temptations' to the extent that he needs to pray that he doesn't fall into temptation.
So I don't see myself as vulnerable where the Holy Spirit has strengthened me, Jesus was like this since birth! He was sinless, I think? But, he still feared temptation. I do not fear temptation where the Holy Spirit has strengthend me/will strengthen me, because I know that I could not possibly be fall into temptation.
This part answers point 'a)':

a) the "fear off God" is, in the Bible, an absolutelly human perception in front off the Holyness of God;


In the answer to point b)
God will not be an athiest, but believe that He is God. So the spirit of God that is supposably in Jesus is that of God. There is no need to pray even as a human, because it is the Spirit that is important.
God does not praise himself through a human form, it is pointless....God is worthy of praise himself.

I think there is something very important you are not understanding/haven't realised:
You said "His human dimension operated his conscience"...but really, it's the Holy Spirit who gave Jesus and us the correct tools in certain situations which were thought to be out of control, and definately an ordeal...to operate our conscience.
And it was up to us that we took the 'good' advice on board and applied it to the situation, so the goog voice in our head is the holy spirit that directed us to a good destination in these ordeal situations.

What I have written is not hard to understand and it is 100% in compliance to the Christian Faith.

Brianman said...

Why is the "word" God in Christianity?

Please give me the best Christian explanation possible please, Christian Scholars, work together please, to find the best explanation..Please report to me when you have the best possible explanation.

I want to understand it because I don't know enough about this idea.

Thank you...and may God (What ever religion he may be from)...bless you all.

Fernando said...

Greetings Dear Brianman...

you saide «Jesus was not tempted, be prayed that he will not fall into temptation.....»...

no Brianman He did not: He asked His disciples to pray so them did not fell in temptation; He prayied so the dead He knew was going to come to Him did not came...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman...

you saide: «Jesus was sinless, I think? But, he still feared temptation»...

ounce again: where is it saide thate Jesus feared temptation? As I saide before: He was tempted, butt did not fell on temptation...

More: the Holy Spirit does not make someone "de per se" sinless... the person has to give his agreement to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit... his action is not invencible nor an imposition...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman... you saide: «So the spirit of God that is supposably in Jesus is that of God. There is no need to pray even as a human, because it is the Spirit that is important»...

Dear Brianman... I understand your point, butt in men is always the Holy Spirit that prays, when men give theire ackpnoledge to His loving inspiration to God: «the Spirit too comes to help us in our weakness, for, when we do not know how to pray properly, then the Spirit personally makes our petitions for us in groans that cannot be put into words» (Rm. 8:26)... so: another reaon thate, being Jesus so full off the Holy Spirit, woulde, in His human dimention, pray to God...

Fernando said...

Dera Brianman, you saide: «God does not praise himself through a human form, it is pointless....God is worthy of praise himself»...

why do you say it's pointless? Woulde Jesus, 100% human and 100% divine, not pray to God? Praying is not only "asking" butt rather a profound talk... don't you speak withe yourself? Do you think this is pointless? And heve you ever thought thate in the horizon of love the more efective is whate is not pragmatic?

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman, you saide: «I think there is something very important you are not understanding/haven't realised»...

thakes for thate so humble expression from you...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman, how are you? I hppe you're very well... you saide: «it's the Holy Spirit who gave Jesus and us the correct tools in certain situations which were thought to be out of control, and definately an ordeal... to operate our conscience. And it was up to us that we took the 'good' advice on board and applied it to the situation, so the goog voice in our head is the holy spirit that directed us to a good destination in these ordeal situations»...

habe you notived, in the parts I placed in a fort tipe off letter, thate you say thate the Hoily Spirit gives us the tools to operate our conscience and then thate the Holy Spirit is our conscience in itself?

Yes: I also do believe thate in us, "only" humans, the Holy Spirit speaks in our conscience, butt the voice off our conscience is nott always the voice off the Holy Spirit... our egocentrism can also speaks to us through the conscience... a sinner is always listenning to his counscience telling him to continue to sin... the voice off the Holy Spirit is as love is: frail: He does not force anyone...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman... do remenber thate the humanity off Jesus was like our humanity (iff it was not He could habe not saved us by assuming our nature): inclined to egocentrism... He had to, as we common humans have to do, make a continues decision not to sin... Jesus was sinless because in every situation he directed His human dimention to His divine one: thates the gosl off humanity: make our liffes configurated to the will off God...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman... you saide thate «God will not be an athiest, but believe that He is God»...

Even iff Jesus knew, more and more even in his human dimention, thate HE was God, He woulde still pray to God since He never left his human nature, and this nature (thate was never obliterated by His divine one) woulde be naturaly religious as in any human being...

Fernando said...

Dear Brianman... you asked: «Why is the "word" God in Christianity?»

did you meant why, or whate?...

lets suppose thate you indeed meant whate you wrote... the word God his in Christianity because He Christians do believe thate there is a supreme being, infinite, omnipotent, omnisciente, omnipresent thate commonly is called, by any human culture, God...

butt we, Christians, followinfg the OT do beliebe thate thate supreme being (commonly called God) is not an anonimous being: He as a name: YHWH... and more: we also know thate YHWH is Father, Son and Holy Spirit...

so: we Christians, as human beings inmersed in a cultural background off other human beings, call thate supreme being "God" (a refference to God's nature), butt, as Christians, we do also use the personal noun YHWH (a first refference to the personal nature of God), or the name off one off the 3 "upostasis" of YHWH: Father, Son and Holy Spirit(a more perfect refference to the personality of God)...

tnakes Brianman... lets keep yout question comming... and I'll repeat my words: Dear Brianman... glad to see you wantting to putt your questions forward... lets keep them comming... butt remember: use this blogg also to question the muslim faith... I'm sure the muslim people around here will be also glad to answer your questions: this is, after all, "answering muslims"...

may God help you in your search off the truth...

Brianman said...

I don't really understand trinity, I mean...so there are three persons which make one God...and the three persons are equal in every way (apart from nature in the sense that Jesus is 100% human and 100% God, and God the Father is not human), but they are equal persons.

What if they are not equal persons? Does this mean trinity belief is wrong? Do they have to even be three equal persons to validate Christianity?

And I can't help but think that Muhammad borrowed texts from the words of Gospels in arabia as well as got information from people who used to preach the religion.

Thanks

May the God of whatever religion give you joy.

Ali said...

WomenForTruth, we can see denial from fernando. I can't remeber what post i refuted him on but it was only a few weeks ago.
I proved to him (we were talking about women) that the basic 12 rights granted under the sharia were NOT respected under the taliban rule.
Fernando didn't mention about him contradicting his friend fatman either. guess he denies that too.

//1) do these Taliban folow the 5 pilars off islam?

2) do they folow sharia law interpreted according to the major scools off islamic jurisprudence?//

no, they did not follow the 5 pillars properly. They put on rules on nearly everything. eid, yet another example i'm giving you, women could not celebrate it. only men with again, rules.

your second claim is a shot in the foot. it is becoming quite clear you're knoweledge on islam is limited.

Fernando said...

Hi Brianman... aboutte the Trinity...

just one "natural" exemple...

Imagine a blokk off Ice placed in a big microwave... in a particular time we could have, at the same time:

1) water in the form off "ice": solid water;

2) water in the form off "water": liquid water;

3) water in the form off "water vapor": gas water...

so: we have one element: water;

and thate same element in three fases: solid, liquid and gas...

in all these fases, the element is absoluttely the same, butt thate same element subsists in three phases thate are really different...

so: how many elements do we have? 1.

and how many phases do we have? 2...

iff in nature this can happen why can't it bee real in God? In God, by the way, the 3 persons are only equal in their connection to the divine nature; they are divine; butt they are totally diffrent in theire relative relations: tha Father is nott the Son neither the Spirit; the Son is not the Father or the Spirit; the Spirit is not the Son neither the Father...

solid water, gas water and liquid water are all water; butt gas is not liquid and bothe are not solid...

so, when you asked «What if they are not equal persons? Does this mean trinity belief is wrong? Do they have to even be three equal persons to validate Christianity?», I woulde say thate they are nott 3 equal persons, butt 3 person equal in the total and absolute participation in the divine nature...

another point: the greek word used to express whate the Bible teatches is "uspostasis" thate was, latter, translated into latin (as the theologians did not find a better word) as "persona", thate gabe the englishe word "person"... butt take notice: "upostasis" is not whate we, nowadays, consider to bee a "person"... the 3 divine "persons" are not "persons" like you and me... thates a common error due to the limits off language; butt "upostasis" mean, more or less, "center off conscience"... so: we woulde have a single God with 3 centers off conscience...

May God bless you Brianman in your quest for truth... as I'm a Christian I woulde love thate, one day, you woulde accept Christianity... I woulde indeed, butt the important for you is thate you follow your true conscience liberated from your natural egocentrism and be responsable to thate tiny divine voice thate speaks in it... many blessings also to your family...

Fernando

Ilena said...

ur right abt quran and muhammad brianman. quran is plagiarised. and btw. god would never send one witness account as a perfect solution 4 the mankind. here r some useful links:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Tisdall/Sources/

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=3718&sid=d8839cc61334196add6188abc4adba68

Paul Guralivu said...

To Brianman:

"I don't really understand trinity, I mean...so there are three persons which make one God...and the three persons are equal in every way (apart from nature in the sense that Jesus is 100% human and 100% God, and God the Father is not human), but they are equal persons.".

We christians believe that God is so big(not from a physical point of view), so great, so clean, so Light, so might(All-mighty) that our human mind can't comprehend.

And this God-the creator of the universe choose to reveal to us in the form of a Trinity(I don't mean that He isn't a trinity, He is a Holy Trinity-Triunity), because a Father-Son relation is something we can comprehend. The Father-Son relation is a relation of Love, care.

These three persons The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit are equal in all means: might, knowledge, beauty, Love, Truthness.
There isn't a difference between the Son and the Father/Holy Spirit in nature, because The Son didn't had a 100% human nature and 100% divine nature before He came to earth.

He still has the 100% divine nature, which makes Him to the same nature with the other 2 persons. The 100% human nature is relevant from more points of view:
a)The reality of Him coming in body;
b)The reality of Him diying in human body(the spirit doesn't die) for us(we are dead in our spirit and we resurrect in our spirit when we receive Jesus as Lord, God and Savior in our lifes);
c)The reality of the fact that we become God's apdoted children when we receive Jesus in out lifes;
d)The reality of us(humans) resurrecting in the day of Resurrection(some for Eternal life, some for Judgment)

If you want a more phylosophical approach to the matter you should read Boetius. He calls the Inital Substance(the uncreated substance) as undivided, yet it can take more ipostates.

Why we christians believe that Jesus Is God and the Holy Spirit is God, yet God is one ?
a)Jesus is called the Word of God.
Is the word of God created ?
NO.
b)Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of Life, Spirit of Truth, Spirit of God.
Is the Truth(Eternal Truth), Life(God has the life in Himself-uncreated life), God created ?
No. Therefore the Spirit of God, of Truth and of Life isn't created.

This questions we ask muslims many times:
If Jesus is the Word of God(Quran 4:171).
Then Jesus is eternal. Whom is the Only person Eternal ?
God.

Paul.

ashraf said...

kabayaan said:

1) water in the form off "ice": solid water;

2) water in the form off "water": liquid water;

3) water in the form off "water vapor": gas water...

hi fer how about moisture, water can be as moisture also, if you mix water with alcohol it becomes alcohol, if you drink & it comes out in other form.

i suggest you to give example of Egg,three in one, father- egg yolk,white - saviour jesus (Son) shell - holy ghost. or apple, seed ,flesh and skin there are so many examples pare.

pare i really appreciate your explanation, amazing. i think it's enough for brother brianman to understand christianity.

ashraf said...

Paul Guralivu said...

This questions we ask muslims many times:
If Jesus is the Word of God(Quran 4:171).
Then Jesus is eternal. Whom is the Only person Eternal ?
God.


Dear paul,

for the confusing concept of trinity or triunity, you have given 1 1/2 page explanation to brianman.then why don't you go for word of god in quran.we muslims haven't given explanation about it?

i thought you are not a double standard christian like all here, but you are going with them only. too sad.

Fernando said...

Hi Ali... can you explain us all whate you mean thate the Talians «did not follow the 5 pillars properly»?... It woulde bee great to learn something aboutte this... I'm willing, with my heart open to thate possibility, to change my views...

you also saide thate the Talibans «put on rules on nearly everything»... you mean like in islamic sharia law thate even has, according to muhammad, a rule to the hand thate must be used to clean the bottom? Or you mean in any other way?

you also saide: «your second claim [aboutt the taliban following whate is saide to bee islamic by the majour schools os islamic jurisprudence] is a shot in the foot»... really? has any orthodox fathwa been directted to the Taliban saying yhate they were proceding as unislamic? as the islamic world thone anything to say: "Hey, wahte you're doing is not islamic"?

Finally... iff whate you saide was only a few weaks ago, itt mustte be fresh in your mind... so: I ask, I begg you: could you place it here again? thankes... When I read itt I did not gabe itt any importance: I thought you were simply expressing some vacuus statements... thankes...

t_a_s said...

Well actually, I have given an explanation about Jesus as the "word" in the Qur'an.

I just thought about it the other day!
I'm Brianman's mate....he's a year older than me, but he is still living in the same area as me because he is on a gap year. I am now interested in serving Islam with rational thought.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=6590312557191237519&postID=223467877112562575

There is the REAL Islamic response that I thought of just now.

I'm not going to stay on these forums for that long.

There is no reason whatsoever to believe in the TRINITY, it's all just man-made thought and assumptions built on many MAN MADE/EDITTED SOURCES! (from the NT).

Man is 'inclined to sin', editting authentic texts as well as trying to justify prophecies in the OT are just sinful TO MY OPINION.

The last thing I would do is disrespect you all because you are a 'person of the book', the religions we all follow has a peaceful effect on us, so lets stay peaceful.

Salam

T_A_S

t_a_s said...

Another idea about the trinity...

Egg yolk, egg white and Egg shell....

John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. KJV

The Father is greater than the Holy Spirit and the 'Divine Jesus'...So, the Father being a part of trinity is greater than all...logically, Divine Jesus and the Holy Spitiy.

If the father is greater than all, then he is in a category of his own....I disagree that God can be a triune God if God the Father is greater than all, it is a GREATER assumption to say that God the Father is God and anyone else is not.

You can't say "Jesus is only 100% human, 100% man, so he is weaker. but the Father is greater than all....EVEN IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN...ALL...God the Father is greater than the Holy spirit.

There is no arguing against what I said.

t_a_s said...

My view on "the word of Allah" is under the title:

""Osama Abdallah Declares: "I'll Be Enjoying My Virgins While You Christians Rot in Hell!""

Paul Guralivu said...

To ashraf:

"for the confusing concept of trinity or triunity, you have given 1 1/2 page explanation to brianman.then why don't you go for word of god in quran.we muslims haven't given explanation about it?".

You are a muslim. right ?
If you are one then you must know that there is a strong debate about the "Word of God". Is he created or not ?
Many shia are saying that the word of God is created. But most of the Sunni accept the Word of God as uncreated.

Why is this dicussion ?
Because we know that "kalimatullah" is the Word of Allah.
Is kalimatullah eternal ?
To understand this we must check the arabic of Qur'an.

‘Alqaa’ means “to throw, cast, fling, offer, commit, or convey”. This meaning of the physical throwing or casting of an object is strongly reflected in the story of
Moses when he threw a rod “Then (Moses) threw[alqa] his rod[‘asa], and behold! it was a serpent, plain (for all to see)! [Faalqa AAasahu fa-itha hiya thuAAbanun mubeenun]” Surah 7:107 “(God) said, `Throw[alqi] it, O Moses!’ [Qala alqiha ya moosa] He threw[alqa] it, and behold! It was a snake, active in motion. [Faalqaha fa-itha hiya hayyatun tasAAa].” Surah 20:20,21 “So (Moses) threw[alqa] his rod [‘asa], and behold, it was a serpent, plain (for all to see)! [Faalqa AAasahu fa-itha hiya thuAAbanun mubeenun] “ Surah 26:32 “Moses said to them:`Throw[alqoo] ye - that which ye are about to throw!’ [Qala lahum moosa alqoo ma antum mulqoona] Then Moses threw[alqa] his rod[asa], when, behold, it straightway swallows up all the falsehoods which they fake! [Faalqa moosa AAasahu fa-itha hiya talqafu ma ya/fikoona] “ Surah 26:44.45

Before one can throw an object, that object must have existed in the first place. Hence, His Word[Kalimatuhu] and also called Spirit[Ruhu min hu] must also be in existence before Jesus was conceived in Mary’s womb. Jesus as Kalimat and Ruh existed with God before he was born !

Surah 4:171
Ya ahla alkitabi la taghloo fee deenikum wala taqooloo AAala Allahi illa alhaqqa innama almaseehu AAeesa ibnu maryama rasoolu Allahi wakalimatuhu alqaha ila maryama waroohun minhu faaminoo biAllahi warusulihi wala taqooloo thalathatun intahoo khayran lakum innama Allahu ilahun wahidun subhanahu an yakoona lahu waladun lahu ma fee alssamawati wama fee al-ardi wakafa biAllahi wakeelan.

This is my argument against Muslim argument that Jesus was created when God said "Be!".

Please refute it.

Paul.

Fernando said...

Hi ashraf...

you saide: «hi fer how about moisture, water can be as moisture also, if you mix water with alcohol it becomes alcohol, if you drink & it comes out in other form»...

the problem with this example is thate "water"+"alchool" is no longuer water... Eben in Jesus, the Second Uposuatsis off the Trinity, case, being himself incarnated, He did not mistured Himselff withe humanity...

you also saide: i suggest you to give example of Egg,three in one, father- egg yolk,white - saviour jesus (Son) shell - holy ghost. or apple, seed ,flesh and skin there are so many examples pare... thankes for your examples... butt the point is thate in all off these you do not habe a single element as I presented withe the case off water... you have one realitty composed intrinsequely by divinding parts made off diferent elements...

so, unless you wanted to make funny off whate I saide, your attempt was nott good enough..

finnaly you saide: «pare i really appreciate your explanation, amazing. i think it's enough for brother brianman to understand christianity»...

2 points:

#1: you called him "brother"... does thate mean (you know) he's a muslim? since he saide he was no Christian I did not called him thate in order not to offend him...

#2: I did not explained all Christianity, I just gave an example so he could, in a distant aspect, try to see thate the realitty off the Trinity is nott alienigenous even to the natural world...

thankes anyway ashraf...

Fernando said...

Hi t_a_s...

glade to see you arounde here... to me its no problemm to interact withe any muslim... I also used to bee a muslim ounce... I love all muslims and habe been doing some good (at least to me) debates with ashraf and Osama Abdallah... perhaps I can interchange some words withe you also... no proselitism intension on my part: just give the best accurated description off whate his Christianity and islam...

you made some points...

1)yous aide: «There is no reason whatsoever to believe in the TRINITY, it's all just man-made thought and assumptions built on many MAN MADE/EDITTED SOURCES! (from the NT)»...

dear t_a_s... so one woulde ever invent the idead off the Trinity (as strange as It is) iff a great and profound reallity was not benithe it... This reallity is expressed in different texts from the NT written bu different people at differnt places and different times and all off them pont to thate reallity: Jesus is God; Jesus is different from the Father (also God); and bothe Jesus and teh Father are diffent from the Holy Spirit thate is showned to bee a divine person...

Can you say why you call the NT an edited source? and man made? We do believe thate the NT was ALSO man made, butt NOT ONLY man made: those man wrotte, and rewrotte before theire final form (and being so: edited... or in other words: this editting process untill the final form off the text is itself inspired...), inspired by the Holy Spirit thate assured us thate the truth was being vehiculatted (the sin existed, butt the Holy Spirit denied thate those sin maculatted the soteriological message in the Bible)...

the notion off revelation in the Bible and in the qur'an are quite different as you should know: in the Bible is an intrinsic one; in the qur'am is an extrinsic one...

I know thate thate is a problem for you muslims since a famous muhammad's scribbe told him to change some words (thate muhammad had dictated based in his supposed revelations... thate no one coulde testify...) so the text became more beautifull... so: here we not only have to sinfull persons (muhammad and his scribe) butt also a clear expression thate they cooperated to change the suposedly words from allah... its in your sources, nott in my mind...

you also saide thate I'm a "person of the book"... No I'm not... no Christian is... thate's another mistake (certainly based on muhamamd ignorance aboutt Christianity) islam has: Christians are people off a Person: Jesus... we do not worship the Bible... more: muslims schoolars disagree on iff Christians and Jews, nowadays, are "people off the bokk", since, as you mighte habe expressed, some claim (without any single historical proof) thate the Bible we habe today is no longuer the true Bible... so: in whate do we stand in your argumentation?

Fernando said...

Dear t_a_s gabe, as do muslims apologists withoute any knowledge on whate they are talking (I guess you habe heard many off these aboutte this aspect) the example off «Egg yolk, egg white and Egg shell» to speek about the Trinity...

sorry t_a_s... as I explained to ashraf thate is nott a valid example... in the example I gabe we have ONLY ONE CHEMICAL element in THREE DIFFERENT PHASES (no parts)... in the example you gave we have SEVERAL CHEMICAL ELEMENTS thate creatte DIFFERENT PARTS off a reallity...

Fernando said...

Dear t_a_s... you (using some old argumentations thate no serius person do use) saide a lot off things based on this passage off the Bible: «My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. KJV» (John 10:29)...

why have you not quoted also the immediattly following verse? It reads: «The Father and I are one»...

dear t_a_s... just some points:

1) why do you use the Bible, iff you beliebe It is corrupted, to deny its message? you habe to be coherentv and do not use it whatesoever...

2) a difference in mission is nott, de per se, a difference in onthology...

in other words: whate I do differently to whate my twin brother does not make me less twin brother than him... iff we had to decide wich one off us woulde try to descend trough a small holle with a small video camera equiped with infrared vision to save our family cat (withe the other coordinatting the effords and sustainning the rope used to pull us -- me and the family cat -- back to the surface) and I was the one WE BOTH CHOSE to perform thate action, thate does nott imply thate my brother was more important than me in whate we are ONTHOLOGIQUELY BETWEEN US (we are both ywin brothers) eben iff HE WAS, during the rescuing mission I was doing, "BIGGER" THAN ME because He was seeing (using the images sent by the infrared camera I was takking) whate I needed to do and telling me so...

BOTH persons off the Trinity decided wich one off Them would become human (without leaving being divine), and during the time Thate Person (the Son) was incarnated, due to the fact He was performing a mission thate the Father was nott doing (and becoming incarnated is, as Paul admited, a freely assumed limitation), the Father was (nott onthologiquely, rather only in thate precise mission) "bigger" than the Son...

glade for your well intentioned words... may God help you in your quest for the truth...

t_a_s said...

I and the father are one....I advise YOU to read the context.

I see it all in a different perspective...keeping my mind open.
I can't be bothered talking about it, I'm sure you know it.

Fernando said...

Dear t_a_s: you saide: «I and the father are one....I advise YOU to read the context. I see it all in a different perspective... keeping my mind open. I can't be bothered talking about it, I'm sure you know it»...

I'm the only one who's readding in the context... not you, I'm sorry to say so... whatte a proff? could you all explainne us WHATE IS THE CONTEXT you BELIEBE THATE IS PRESENT IN THIS TEXT? Could you eben bee hable to say where does the pericopous where this text is presented, do start band do end?...

they I must say thate you habbe a reall funny way to be coherent: you say in the same sentence: «keeping my mind open» and «I can't be bothered talking about it»... iff you can't bee bothered talkin aboutt this, you do nott habe an open mind... sorry to say thate...

just one thingue then: whate is the context off the words you, and me latter, presented?

Fernando said...

Dear t_a_s: here's the name off muhammad's scribe who changed the words supposdly giben to muhammad bie allah: Abdullah Ibn Abu Sarh...

does this name ring a bell to you? I guess you'll bee to busy to investigatte him... or perhaps you're too afraide off los«ing your religion thate is (Abdullah Ibn Abu Sarh history is the proof off thate), in your own words, MAN MADE...

Glad to see you arounde here... may God help you in your quest for the truth... and may Him bless you and your entire family... I'm also praying for you all..

t_a_s said...

What i mean is that I can't be bothered writing it all down because writing comments on this site is not a "full-time" thing...I have a life beyond this site where i am a student who wants to work hard in his a levels (your equivalent to high school if you live in america) and get a degree from a top univeristy since I already have offers from there.

I have found a huge flaw in your general reasoning.

But I really cant be bothered writing it down and explaining it...I have a life to live rather than to explain my view of a man thinking in what I like to call I closed circle of thought....
I'll give you a mere example....

they I must say thate you habbe a reall funny way to be coherent: you say in the same sentence: «keeping my mind open» and «I can't be bothered talking about it»... iff you can't bee bothered talkin aboutt this, you do nott habe an open mind... sorry to say thate...

When I said "keeping my mind open" i meant that in a different context (about trying to understand the belief of I and the Father are One etc etc. without holding any bias)....and when I said "I can't be bothered talking about it" I can't be bothered writing it in a comment. An essence of what I believe is already presented anyway by people who don't believe in the trinity.
Your conclusions and impressions about me here are very, very wrong...it doesn't even make sense.

Look Fernando, I respect you as a human being, but when I type, I will not be talking about YOU, and refuting YOU, I will be refuting/giving my ideas on your triune views.

So I expect the same respect back..i.e let's talk like the person from islamicawareness and less like how Sam Shamoun and Osama Abdallah write..

I'm sorry but I don't want you to write back to me unless you are going to be critical about the reasoning I have given in support of Islam.

Let us not give any cheeky comments anymore..or saying things like "haha you are contradicting your own words..bla bla bla"...it's ridiculous...lets just let scholarly reasoning do the talking....
STARTING FROM NOW!

t_a_s said...

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Sarh/

Now I'm doing some chemistry.

Fernando said...

Dear t_a_s... I'm deeply sorry for habe been mislead bie your own words... butt then: its only on them I can be based to dialogue withe you... unless you present your reasonings to sustain your words I cannot guess whate you mean... so: iff someone made a mistake arounde here was you: I justt simply took the consequences from whate you saide...

You also saide: «i'm sorry but I don't want you to write back to me unless you are going to be critical about the reasoning I have given in support of Islam»...

dear t_a_s: so far you did not present anything to defend islam... you just started attacking the Bible and the Trinity... I just responded to you on those matters... Butt then... I'm not your slabe to do whate you want or eben order me... you could have asked thate politelly... lets suppose you did preciselly thate... I'll defende always Christianity from your false assumptions and, yes, I'll always bee critical on you position on islam... butt so far you have nott spoken aboutt it (p.s.: I consider gibing links to read as not having done whatesoever... iff you have points off your own, please do present them here... iff not, don't eben bother... I'm not DEBATING this or thate author, I'm TALKING to those who want to dialogue)

you also saide: «Let us not give any cheeky comments anymore...»... jyst fine from me... just remember thate it was you thate from the star started, without eben presenting a prrof for your saids, attacking the bible and the Trinity...

you also saide: «or saying things like "haha you are contradicting your own words..bla bla bla"...it's ridiculous...»...

Iff your words seem to those who read them (without being parapsychologous to guess the meaning off them) to present contradiction, I'll alway say so... a contradiction is always a sign off a non-valid argumentation...

you also saide: «lets just let scholarly reasoning do the talking...»...

absoluttely true... to sad you did nott start by there from the start and decided to attack the Bible and the Trinity with no argumements whate so ever... your friend Brianman did the right thing: asked questions... you simply started playing jokes aboutt eggs, and the Bible being (only) MAN MADE and preseenting false reasonings abouute John 10:29 without 10:30 and not having a single clue whate is the context or the delimitations off the pericoupous where these verses are inserted... whate to prove me wrong? just say, in a scholarly way whate I asked you:

could you all explainne us WHATE IS THE CONTEXT you BELIEBE THATE IS PRESENT IN THIS TEXT? Could you eben bee hable to say where does the pericopous where this text is presented, do start band do end?

finally you saide: «STARTING FROM NOW!»... And I saide: I'm not your slabe to do whate you want or eben order me... you could have asked thate politelly... butt let's beliebe itt so... from know only scoolardy debate on elements presented here and nott from this or thate site: thate would not bee schoolarly... not "doing copy and past"... not presenting personal elements is nott presenting arguments whate so ever...

glade to be allowed to make this things clear so we can stay on a good dialogue level... may Jesus Christ, our God, help you and your familie...

t_a_s said...

Fernando..I didn't read a word of that..I never will..I didn't write any text about Islam/christianity, so I am not expecting you to write back.

Fernando said...

Dear t_a_s saide: «I didn't write any text about Islam/christianity»...

so, whate you mean aboutt these words:

«Egg yolk, egg white and Egg shell.... John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. KJV The Father is greater than the Holy Spirit and the 'Divine Jesus'...So, the Father being a part of trinity is greater than all...logically, Divine Jesus and the Holy Spitiy. If the father is greater than all, then he is in a category of his own....I disagree that God can be a triune God if God the Father is greater than all, it is a GREATER assumption to say that God the Father is God and anyone else is not. You can't say "Jesus is only 100% human, 100% man, so he is weaker. but the Father is greater than all....EVEN IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN...ALL...God the Father is greater than the Holy spirit. There is no arguing against what I said»...

to me this seems a text about Christianity... does itt nott...

butt the most amaizing statement is the last one: «There is no arguing against what I said»...

obviusly not... you started from a verse without considering the one following immediately after and ignoring the context off those verses and the extend off the pericoupous in wich they are inserted... butt ignoring thate, I answered you quitte well: in context and in the extend off the pericoupous...

everyone can see who has done whate...

finally you saide: «I am not expecting you to write back»... I'm nott your dhimmy... so, yes, I wrotte back: we Christians live in the freedom off the children off God...

May Jesus, our true God and saviour, bless you and your entire family...

p.s.: everytime you writte to me I'll answer you just to be polite... thanks...

t_a_s said...

Dear t_a_s saide: «I didn't write any text about Islam/christianity»...

so, whate you mean aboutt these words:

«Egg yolk, egg white and Egg shell.... John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. KJV The Father is greater than the Holy Spirit and the 'Divine Jesus'...So, the Father being a part of trinity is greater than all...logically, Divine Jesus and the Holy Spitiy. If the father is greater than all, then he is in a category of his own....I disagree that God can be a triune God if God the Father is greater than all, it is a GREATER assumption to say that God the Father is God and anyone else is not. You can't say "Jesus is only 100% human, 100% man, so he is weaker. but the Father is greater than all....EVEN IN THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN...ALL...God the Father is greater than the Holy spirit. There is no arguing against what I said»...

to me this seems a text about Christianity... does itt nott...

No, it is trying to show that the members of the trinity are not equal, God the Father not only is the 'greatest', but he is also the all knowing as no one knows when the hour comes but the father only - which is what a bible quote said lol...

butt the most amaizing statement is the last one: «There is no arguing against what I said»...Well, no there is no argument because you agree with it, because your bible does.

obviusly not... you started from a verse without considering the one following immediately after and ignoring the context off those verses and the extend off the pericoupous in wich they are inserted... butt ignoring thate, I answered you quitte well: in context and in the extend off the pericoupous...

Well it says I and the father are one...but they are one in purpose as the context shows.
To be honest, I'll prefer to go about properly refuting points rather than beating around the bush like how me and you are doing.

everyone can see who has done whate...

finally you saide: «I am not expecting you to write back»... I'm nott your dhimmy... so, yes, I wrotte back: we Christians live in the freedom off the children off God...

Yes, you are not proving anything here...when I said I am not expecting you to write back, I thought we established that it is not the apprpriate way to act.

In fact, I would prefer to talk to more reputable scholars...like David Wood and that bunch...I sensed that you had a bit of anger in writing what you did.

Us Muslims believe the same about Islam.

May Jesus, our true God and saviour, bless you and your entire family...

p.s.: everytime you writte to me I'll answer you just to be polite... thanks...

It won't be polite if you reply to me now...You are trying to be polite, but you won't be polite in my sight if you keep writing to me...and thus, logically, by replying to me..you won't be being polite towards me.

End of discussion (I won't reply to you anymore) unless I feel I need to...which will be on a scholarly level..because I have got the impression that you have given me false pride, which is not the impression Christians are supposed to be giving off.

May Allah guide you to the truth (Islam).

Fernando said...

(part 1)

Hi t_a_s: you saide, when I proved you were talking aboutt Christianity by talking aboutte the Trinity (a Christian believe):

«No, it is trying to show that the members of the trinity are not equal, God the Father not only is the 'greatest', but he is also the all knowing as no one knows when the hour comes but the father only - which is what a bible quote said lol...»...

so: in your schoolarly opinion talking aboutt the Holy Trinity is nott talking aboutt Christianity?

Hummmm... ok... your level off honesty and schoolarly is now clear to us all...

more: you did not talked aboutt the verse where Jesus said He did nott knew aboutt the "Hour" untill in this last comment... how devious can someone be... do you eben know the meaning off the biblical concept off "the hour"? And do you understand whate I saide aboutt the real divinity off Jesus being limited by His human dimention?

Hummmm... ok... your level off honesty and schoolarly is now clear to us all...

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «Well it says I and the father are one...but they are one in purpose as the context shows.
To be honest, I'll prefer to go about properly refuting points rather than beating around the bush like how me and you are doing»
...

really? So, according to you, Jo. 10:30 in CONTEXT means "one in purpose"... well: I'm sorry to say this (I'm not wantting to desincourage you from studying the Bible since so far you habe not done so as your comments aboutt the context off these verses and the quote from the "hour" prove...) it does not... it does not... it means a unity in power: the commun power off Jesus and the Father, therefore, an unity in nature...

Hummmm... ok... your level off honesty and schoolarly is now clear to us all...

Dear t_a_s: you also saide: «when I said I am not expecting you to write back, I thought we established that it is not the apprpriate way to act»...

no, dear t_a_s: iff you speak aboutt Christianity (speakking aboutt the Trinity and the Bible) after a comment I made answering a question from your friend Brianman, I'm absoluttely intitelled, in the most approppriatte way (perhaps not in your mind thate creates an oposition between muslims ans dhiimys or kuffars thate are the most vile off persons...), to answer you back speciaty when you attack Chsriatiny and Chrsitians... so: you can expect whate you want... thate won't affect my free conscience...

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «In fact, I would prefer to talk to more reputable scholars...like David Wood and that bunch...»...

after whate you wrotte and the knowledge you manifested in doing so, I'm absoluttely sure Doctor David Wood and the bunch will want to dialogue withe you... sure...

(end off part 1)

Fernando said...

(part 2)

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «I sensed that you had a bit of anger in writing what you did»...

well... where habe you seen thate? In my always calling you "dear"?... no hate whate so ever... only love for you, eben when I consider your argumentations and attacks on Christianity (attacking the Trinity and the Bible) a ville action...

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «It won't be polite if you reply to me now...»...

ok... your true colours off a fan off the muslim supremecist is showing upp... another threat... As I saide: answering you when you started by commenting a comment I did to your frien Brianman is the most polite thing I can do to you... ignoring you woulde bee unpolite... butt then: please: don't bee politte withe me when I'm juste being pollitte withe you... I guess I'll survive...

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «You are trying to be polite, but you won't be polite in my sight if you keep writing to me...and thus, logically, by replying to me..you won't be being polite towards me»..

no, dear t_a_s: I'm being pollite in the NORMAL and MATURE and SOCIALY ESTABLISHED way off intercattring withye NORMAL and MATURE and SOCIALY BALANCED persons... only those who are used to threat and order others to be silenced don't see this... this is the only logic posible... (by the way... I'll place a link in all the newste threatds off this blogg to this present thread so everyone can see your schoolarly aptitudes and pacific intentions...)

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «End of discussion (I won't reply to you anymore) unless I feel I need to...»..

dear t_a_s... who are you to try to silence me? I'm not your slabe or your dhimmy... a discution (in your opinion), a debate (in my opinion) is finished when bothe intervinients agree on thate... you were the first person to talk to mee withe your foonie comment abboutt the egg as an example to the Trinity... so: with al logic, the last person to talk would be me... don't you think so?

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «which will be on a scholarly level...»..

so far, dear t_a_s, no schoolarly comments from you what so eber... just attacking the Trinity, the Bible, not knowing the context off Jo 10:29, nott knowing the most basic meaming off Jo 10:30; nott knowing the meaning off "the hour" in the mouth off Jesus; nott knowing thate placin a link to someone else's words is nott schoolarly... let's waite and see iff you can change this realitty...

dear t_a_s... you also saide: «because I have got the impression that you have given me false pride, which is not the impression Christians are supposed to be giving off»...

dear t_a_s... iff pointting, in the truth and in the most pacific way possible, your lack off knowledge abouut whate you tried to talk aboutt is gibing you a "false pride", the problem is withe you, nott withe me... I guess, nevertheless, this is a typical muslim problem: every non-normal attitude you muslims do (killing, rapping, stealling, lyiend, showin absolutte ignorance...) is due to whate other do as WomenforTrue101 tryied to say in a most previos threat on this blogg... so: we Christians do want to talk aboutte the truth, and iff the truth creattes anti-bodyes in someone is because this "someone" is nott acoostumed to the truth...

finally, dear, dear t_a_s... you also saide: «May Allah guide you to the truth (Islam)»...

I always refrained to invite you to be a Christian... I only asked God, the Trinity (the only God thate exists), to bless you and your family and help you to bee a good human being in whate religion you want to follow... as I saide: no proselitism intention on my part... you, on the other hand, stared invitting me to become amuslim... whate will bee next? will you kill me iff I don't become, ounce again, a muslim? I know thate you are allowed to do so...

dera t_a_s: may God, the Trinity, bless you and your family in your path to the truth and freedom and love... I'll be praying for you...

(ent off part 2)

t_a_s said...

Fernando. I didn't read any of that. I won't be reading any of your comments. So you can write to yourself.

David Wood said...

TAS said: "Fernando. I didn't read any of that. I won't be reading any of your comments. So you can write to yourself."

TAS, if you're openly proclaiming that you're not going to read anyone's responses to your illogical comments, then you lose the right to make your illogical comments here. Find a different blog.

Brianman said...

asdsdf