BETATRON:
the problem with you guys is you find it difficult to comprehend na wa oh

See funny questions abeg ..lol

Well I neva said muhammad is one of the biblical prophets lol...I only said which of the prophets we see in our church today are in the bible?--how come you didn't get that

---the bible is the handiwork of men naw--you can confirm this with the numerous contradictions in it

Compare jibril and gabriel? Lol..you're funny bro...when did the bible become a criteria for the validity of the koran---

I can't shout jare...please ask more sensible questions jare

--questions like--why did the GOd of the old testament support a lot of hedious crime
s

---why did God rest after created the world

---why did God say snakes eat dust

---how can God send himself

---how can God sacrifice himself for himself

---how plausible is trinity

---how genuine and divine is the emergence of trinity
Et cetera et cetera

Are serious? Do you think by saying this trash you have made a point? You want to stand before the whole world and deny your Koran?
So these questions are funny? because you can't answer them, you run off trying to ridicule yourself.
Your Koran says the Muslims shd ask the people of the book whenever they are lost about understanding the Koran, today you stand here and say, the Bible can't be used to validate the Koran. But my dear this id what the Muslims do from the inception of Islam. A Muslim can't stand on his own and talk about the Koran without quoting the Bible. What other validation do you need? Without the Bible the Koran is a mess.
Pls make some sense.
Ur Koran says, Jibril is the same as Gabriel, and I said, proof it. Instead you made fun of yourself.
My dear, maybe you muslims don't know. The world is reading the comments here. The questions here tie you up, instead of answering them, see how you skipped to asking other stupid questions. Grow a brain Bros.

BETATRON:
lol can you read at all?

Well I see you nothing about hadith and it chains of narration

Please go make the following findings

--what makes an hadith authentic

--what is chain of narration and how does it affect the authenticity of an hadith

--i clearly pointed out that not the entire hadith is contradictory to the koran--but there exist some which contradicts the koran and hence we tag those ones as inauthentic cause the koran is the criteria for the authenticity of the hadith and not otherwise

--yeah the hadith cannot be 100 percent correct because the authors and narrators are humans and cannot be 100 percent right

---educate your self on a topic before poking your nose into it---"the wise man speaks because he has something to say while the ignorant man speaks because he has to say something

---the adage the stated is also wrong "God is witness to every body " so it is not true that he who claims that His only witness is God is a liar bro---

Muslims can lie. When it comes to those hadith who which exposes you, you deny them as not being authentic, when the situation favours you, you own them up as authentic. This is Satanic sir. The signature of Satan, is lies.

analice107:

And little wonder you muslims claim that the promised comforter, who is the Holy Spirit, who happens to be the third person in the trinity

first of all are you willing to debate the fact that Spirit means a prophet in the NT(scholar whom you love so much tried but later gave up)? furthermore the word Holy just like other frauds of the bible, was never beside the word spirit in that verse, willing to debate that too?

If you shd agree that the comforter is Muhammed, we will belive that Muhammed is in the trinity.
The bible is corrupt, mutilated, beyond recognition. Yet you recognise it enough to insert your Muhammed into it, why is that? Why do you want your glorious Muhammed inside such a corrupt book? Imao. Satan is a biggg liar.

girl! i am quite happy you couldnt disprove the fact that john5:7 was never part of the bible, masha Allah , i'll keep striking all your hearts with Al-Haqq(the truth)!

analice107:

Muslims can lie. When it comes to those hadith who which exposes you, you deny them as not being authentic, when the situation favours you, you own them up as authentic. This is Satanic sir. The signature of Satan, is lies.

I have always known you, in particular to be very irrational, how many times do i have to say this? Allah told we muslims that we should take the Quran as a criterion over all other things, be it books, acts, etc that has to do with the religion, check chapter 25 of the Quran to see this. Hadith was written years after the noble prophet pbuh, there are bound to be lies and errors in it, thats why hadith normally starts with "i heard from the prophet" meaning it should be scrutinized, it might be a lie ascribed to Muhammad pbuh, thats where the Quran comes in, if it contradicts the quran, then it is discarded, thats what it is.

lexiconkabir:
girl! i am quite happy you couldnt disprove the fact that john5:7 was never part of the bible, masha Allah , i'll keep striking all your hearts with Al-Haqq(the truth)!

there is no sure evidence of this
reading in any Greek manuscript until
the 1500s ; each such reading was
apparently composed after Erasmus’
Greek NT was published in 1516. Indeed,
the reading appears in no Greek witness
of any kind (either manuscript, patristic,
or Greek translation of some other
version) until AD 1215 (in a Greek
translation of the Acts of the Lateran
Council, a work originally written in Latin)
. This is all the more significant, since
many a Greek Father would have loved
such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms
the doctrine of the Trinity. 2 The reading
seems to have arisen in a fourth century
Latin homily in which the text was
allegorized to refer to members of the
Trinity. From there, it made its way into
copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used
by the Roman Catholic Church.

In reality, the issue is history, not heresy:
How can one argue that the Comma
Johanneum must go back to the original
text when it did not appear until the 16th
century in any Greek manuscripts? Such
a stance does not do justice to the
gospel: faith must be rooted in history.
To argue that the Comma must be
authentic is Bultmannian in its method,
for it ignores history at every level. As
such, it has very little to do with biblical
Christianity, for a biblical faith is one that
is rooted in history.

https://bible.org/article/textual-problem-1-john-57-8

lexiconkabir:
I have always known you, in particular to be very irrational, how many times do i have to say this? Allah told we muslims that we should take the Quran as a criterion over all other things, be it books, acts, etc that has to do with the religion, check chapter 25 of the Quran to see this. Hadith was written years after the noble prophet pbuh, there are bound to be lies and errors in it, thats why hadith normally starts with "i heard from the prophet" meaning it should be scrutinized, it might be a lie ascribed to Muhammad pbuh, thats where the Quran comes in, if it contradicts the quran, then it is discarded, thats what it is.

is the hadith a revelation? Yes or no ?

malvisguy212:
is the hadith a revelation? Yes or no ?

its a revelation, which is the more reason why it shouldnt contradict the Quran, gorrit?

malvisguy212:
[size=25pt]there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek manuscript until
the 1500s; each such reading was apparently composed after Erasmus’ Greek NT was published in 1516. Indeed,
the reading appears in no Greek witness
of any kind (either manuscript, patristic,
or Greek translation of some other
version) until AD 1215 (in a Greek
translation of the Acts of the Lateran
Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant, since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity.[/size]

Analice107, can you see that? it came from your role model malvisguy. Hope you know that this thing you copied and pasted does not support you in anyway? rather it exposes the fraud in your religion, thank you though, i will use this your post as reference later, if you like delete it, i have screenshots of it, so its of no use if you delete it

lexiconkabir:
first of all are you willing to debate the fact that Spirit means a prophet in the NT(scholar whom you love so much tried but later gave up)? furthermore the word Holy just like other frauds of the bible, was never beside the word spirit in that verse, willing to debate that too?

1. Bros, but that's not true! Where we concluded was that you wanted the proof that Spirit and Ghost are used interchangeably and I showed you a passage! And can you show where spirit was used instead of prophet ANYWHERE in the NT?

Or did the Quran ever call a prophet, a spirit?

lexiconkabir:
first of all are you willing to debate the fact that Spirit means a prophet in the NT(scholar whom you love so much tried but later gave up)? furthermore the word Holy just like other frauds of the bible, was never beside the word spirit in that verse, willing to debate that too? girl! i am quite happy you couldnt disprove the fact that john5:7 was never part of the bible, masha Allah , i'll keep striking all your hearts with Al-Haqq(the truth)!

Please, why are you this dumb?

So, human being(prophet) and holyspirit(invisible as he is spirit) is the same?

You guys have been trying from time immemorial, to tell people that mohammed is the holyspirit the bible was talking about.
What a dumb...?

Please read the bible well before believing that.
What a shame to human thinking?

The same bible you claim to be corrupted, is the same bible you are twisting verses to suit your fake prophet.

Sorry, you aren't okay!

promisechuks:

[s]Please, why are you this dumb?

So, human being(prophet) and holyspirit(invisible as he is spirit) is the same?

You guys have been trying from time immemorial, to tell people that mohammed is the holyspirit the bible was talking about.
What a dumb...?

Please read the bible well before believing that.
What a shame to human thinking?

The same bible you claim to be corrupted, is the same bible you are twisting verses to suit your fake prophet.

Sorry, you aren't okay![/s]

drop that weed!

Now Mr Lexicon, even the Quran realises that the Holy Spirit is not Muhammed! What then?
A bro of yours(Empiree) said , according to the Quran, Holy Spirit = Angel Gabriel. I want to know if that name is reserved only for Gabriel in the Quran or all angels therein. (i guess he will answer that when he is less busy)

If it be so, how then do you claim when Jesus spoke about sending the Holy Spirit, He was referring to a man when the Quran does not recognize the Personality to be a man? Besides, we have copious examples of the activities of the Holy Spirit (though temporary) in the OT. Do you have evidences for:
1. Activities of Gabriel as the Holy Spirit prior to Mohammed's time among the Arabs? If yes pls give samples

2. You may also want to consider helping out on the question posed to your bro.

@scholar2800, actually, after you lifted that verse that you claimed to have used spirit and ghost interchangeably, i said this

Jesus cried out into your hands i commend my spirit(meaning it is still in him), and having said that he gave up the ghost(the spirit is now out) how was this used interchangeably? when "spirit" meant he still have it in him and giving up the ghost meant the spirit is out. No Englishman that has English as his mother tongue will say "he gave up the spirit" it has always and will always be "he gave up the ghost"

and you didnt say anything afterwards.

lexiconkabir:
Analice107, can you see that? it came from your role model malvisguy. Hope you know that this thing you copied and pasted does not support you in anyway? rather it exposes the fraud in your religion, thank you though, i will use this your post as reference later, if you like delete it, i have screenshots of it, so its of no use if you delete it

that is why I paste the link, read through it.

malvisguy212:
that is why I paste the link, read through it.

mtcheeew, those first facts that the author of the site have stated, already gives me what i want! atleast the author acknowledged everything i had said, period! case closed.

lexiconkabir:
mtcheeew, those first facts that the author of the site have stated, already gives me what i want! atleast the author acknowledged everything i had said, period! case closed.

" In reality, the issue is history, not heresy" from the link

lexiconkabir:
@scholar2800, actually, after you lifted that verse that you claimed to have used spirit and ghost interchangeably, i said this and you didnt say anything afterwards.

Point is both were used interchangeably! Now the grammatical analysis is not necessary:
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Ecclesiastes 12:7

Scholar8200:
Point is both were used interchangeably! Now the grammatical analysis is not necessary:
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Ecclesiastes 12:7

again, spirit was used in that verse because, it is still inside the body of man, if the man dies his body goes back to the dust, and the spirit that was in him goes to God, but remember when the spirit is out of the body, it becomes a ghost, and that verse was not talking of the spirit outside the body.

lexiconkabir:
again, spirit was used in that verse because, it is still inside the body of man, if the man dies his body goes back to the dust, and the spirit that was in him goes to God, but remember when the spirit is out of the body, it becomes a ghost, and that verse was not talking of the spirit outside the body.

We are saying the same thing here! The Holy Ghost came on the disciples and see what was said:

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.
Acts 2:4

Thus settling the fact that the Spirit that was to dwell in them was indeed the Holy Ghost spoken by Jesus in John's Gospel!

lexiconkabir:
its a revelation, which is the more reason why it shouldnt contradict the Quran, gorrit?

what is the main purpose of revealing the hadith ? Or is the quran not enough ? I thought allah say in the quran, "his word is completed" ? Why will you call some hadith false and some authentic ?

malvisguy212:
what is the main purpose of revealing the hadith ? Or is the quran not enough ? I thought allah say in the quran, "his word is completed" ? Why will you call some hadith false and some authentic ?

If I am to use their logic on that other thread,if hadiths are revelations like has been affirmed, the existence of strong, weak and false hadiths also points to corruption and addition! Then, on what basis do they select which is true and false?

malvisguy212:
what is the main purpose of revealing the hadith ? Or is the quran not enough ? I thought allah say in the quran, "his word is completed" ? Why will you call some hadith false and some authentic ?

Don't mind him, all muslims know that islam is full of contradictions and is internally inconsistent, however they have been indoctrinated NEVER to question the quoran so they resort to lying to themselves and others about islam. Allaah claims that his word is complete and easy to understand but al taquiya experts here will tell you that you need hadiths and tasfirs before you can understand what their god wrote.

Scholar8200:
If I am to use their logic on that other thread,if hadiths are revelations like has been affirmed, the existence of strong, weak and false hadiths also points to corruption and addition! Then, on what basis do they select which is true and false?

they accept every hadith that favour their argument. Even the main authentic hadith (sahih bukari and sahih muslim) they claims some are not true. Their are some hadith that have been deleted from the web.

malvisguy212:
what is the main purpose of revealing the hadith ? Or is the quran not enough ? I thought allah say in the quran, "his word is completed"?

The Quran tells us that two things were sent down to the prophet The book(i.e the Quran) and Al-Hikmah(i.e The Sunnah of the prophet), so dont get it twisted.

Why will you call some hadith false and some authentic ?

Because the fake one contradicts the Quran, and Muhammad pbuh cant contradict his Lord, since it is meant to be a revelation.

Scholar8200:
If I am to use their logic on that other thread,if hadiths are revelations like has been affirmed, the existence of strong, weak and false hadiths also points to corruption and addition! Then, on what basis do they select which is true and false?

No, every Muslim knows that the Hadith is not 100% perfect, because it was narrated by people claiming they heard this from the prophet, they heard that from the prophet, so the only way to detect if the narration is authentic is to check the Quran if it coincides with it, if it does, then it is graded sahih(authentic). For it to be a revelation, it has to be authentic, Muhammad pbuh cant contradict his Lord, but because the hadith were compiled years after the prophet's death, then they are bound to be lies ascribed to him, the only way these lies are detected is to check the Quran, i hope you now understand?

malvisguy212:
by the time quran 16:89 was revealed, more verses were yet to be revealed, does it mean since quran 16:89 say the book was complete, no need to revealed others passages ? This hadith was clearly understood , muhammed wanted to write a documents that will guide the muslims not to go astray, he died with this revelation.

where are u getting alk this hadith from? u can just come here and tell us simething is hadith and u xpect us to bliv u...moreover if they are hadith are they authetic??

BETATRON:
lol..its not like that bro..the hadith is contradicting the Koaran

The hadith the result of human narration the koran is DEVINE

Which do we take the DEVINE statement or the human statement.?

i was xpecting u to ask him if e knows if the hadith is authentic or not.
we cant just bliv whatever malvisguy02 calls an hadith, HE IS A VERY GOOD LIAR.. y is e not using ayat in the Quan?? bcoz e knows e can be easily discovered...y is e using only hadith?.
that guy is a case, he will never accept the truth even when is obvious

BETATRON:
lol..its not like that bro..the hadith is contradicting the Koaran

The hadith the result of human narration the koran is DEVINE

Which do we take the DEVINE statement or the human statement.?

i was xpecting u to ask him if e knows if the hadith is authentic or not.
we cant just bliv whatever malvisguy02 calls an hadith, HE IS A VERY GOOD LIAR.. y is e not using ayat in the Quan?? bcoz e knows e can be easily discovered...y is e using only hadith says this hadith says that??
that guy is a case, he will never accept the truth even when is obvious

lexiconkabir:
No, every Muslim knows that the Hadith is not 100% perfect, because it was narrated by people claiming they heard this from the prophet, they heard that from the prophet, so the only way to detect if the narration is authentic is to check the Quran if it coincides with it, if it does, then it is graded sahih(authentic). For it to be a revelation, it has to be authentic, Muhammad pbuh cant contradict his Lord, but because the hadith were compiled years after the prophet's death, then they are bound to be lies ascribed to him, the only way these lies are detected is to check the Quran, i hope you now understand?

Alright.

true2god:
Who else does allahh speak to aside mohammed? How can one trust a god (allahh) who will end up abrogating or changing his own word in order to favour mohammed (camel piss be upon him), depending on the situation mohammed found himself.

It is either allahh is the same person with mohammed or allahh never existed at all.

watch ur tongue man, it mayb used against ryt from ur gravd even before d last day.

BETATRON:
that the koran was sent to muhammad by Allah is true,jibril acting as the medium btw muhammad and Allah doesn't mean that jibril is ithe owner of the content of the koran

It is the case of a post man the letter is note his(the postman's own) he is just serving as a medium between the owner of the letter and the receiver of the letter--2 and 3

the koran clearly states "do they note ponder on the koran,if it is from other than Allah they would have found there-in much contradictions--so the koran does not say the koran cannot be wrong because it was sent to one man but because it was from God--like you know every attempt to proof that the koran contains contradictions as gone futile-1

Muslim don't say the bible is wrong because YAHWEH spoke to numerous prophets but because it has been infiltrated by evil intending men--maybe you should make more findings on what transpired and the council of nacea---as you know too many hands spoils the cook--4

I believe a story which is logically and intellectually true weda this truth is followed by one man or by the entire world--truth has nothing to do with number does it?

All the prophets it our churches today where were they mentioned in the bible?

Like Í said in number 4 because it has been infiltrated by evil intending men both the old and the new

Muhammad brought the NAMe islam(as the seal of the prophet) but the practice as been since the time of adam..as you know all the prophets in the bible including christ preached monotheism and not trinity
And this is eternal life that they know You the ONE TRUE GOD and jesus whom you SENT-jesus

The lORD thy GOD is ONE--moses

insha Allah u shall not miss your reward.

OLAJADON:

insha Allah u shall not miss your reward.

How many virgins will he be rewarded with for these lies he lied for allaah?