₦airaland Forum

Dapo777:
Just a question for you.
Who was there to witness this Genesis creation event, before God created Adam?

How can a creature be a witness to its creation process? Is like asking you were you there when your parent are planning to marry?

Does this question even sound logical to you?

Did God narrate to Adam how he created the earth before he created him(Adam)?

How can I know this?

Though God might tell Adam because there's a gross reference from the Bible that God actually visiting Adam before the fall BUT nowhere in the Bible we read it.

RikoduoSennin:
Because Rev 3:14 and Col 1:15- 18 says so.

Rev 3:14 and Col 1:15-18 would contradict John 1:3 if actually what the two books were saying is that God created Jesus first before using Him to create other things.

Also the above Scripture does not disprove that- he merely stated that Jesus is the master worker used to create everything,

Is the master worker used to create everything INCLUDING Himself, right?

You're wrong the verse is very cleared "...NOT EVEN ONE THING CAME INTO EXISTENCE, what has come into existence"

You believe Jesus came INTO existence because He was created THEN the verse says "NOT EVEN ONE THING CAME INTO EXISTENCE"

just the same way "a Senator" uses a "Civil Engineer" to build/supervised his estates. Who actually owns the building- the Civil Engineer or the Senator.

Firstly, your logic here contradict your below statement. The Senator is the owner!

Secondly, we are not talking about who uses one to achieve something BUT WHAT CAME FIRST INTO EXISTENCE!

*Jehovah witness says Jesus was first created/brought into existence before God used Him to create other thing.
*John 1:3 says NOTHING COME INTO EXISTENCE/CREATED without Jesus.
*This implies that Jesus is the very one who brought Himself into existence/created Himself according to JWs.

No, that is not the conclusion at all, Same way Jesus did not "resurrect himself"

Jesus said He will be the one who will raise Himself up, didn't you read that in the Bible?

sa(y)me way he did not create himself.

JWs says so in the light of John 1:3

Everything was made because of him and for him by his Father and God- Jehovah.

This contradict your above logic about Senator/Civil Engineer illustration because the Civil Engineer has nothing to do about the project anymore and the project was not built because of/for the Civil Engineer.

Secondly, Bible says everything was also created because of/for/by the Father, so what do you say about that?

Why else would Jesus need or have a God whom he answers to if he was not created? (John 20:17)

Why else would Jesus accept been called God when He is not God? John 20:28

But you can believe what you want to. You have a right to your opinion- right or wrong.

Then why do you quote me in the first place?

Dapo777:
I think I am more comfortable with this explanation than Reyginus explanation, What he was trying to make me accept is that the first light wasn't visible to human eyes,Which I just can't make myself accept it,But you would agree the light is visible,at least we are getting somewhere with that realization.

I'm really impressed with your open mind towards my post. God will continue to enlighten our mind and expand our knowledge about Himself. Amen! because I'm a fallible man with a limited mind trying to discern the mind of an infallible and unlimited God. In fact I've learnt something on this thread.

Now how do you know that God removed this first light after using it to start his creation? No Where in the book of Genesis is it stated that God removed the light.

To answer your question we must first ask ourselves this, where was the FIRST LIGHT placed/positioned?

According to Genesis 1:3 the Light has no position nor been described as an OBJECT unlike the second Light in Gen 1:14 that has position and been described as an object. "And God said, let there be LIGHT in the FIRMAMENT of heaven…17 And God set THEM in the firmament of heaven..." this indicate that this light is actually an OBJECT and HAVING A POSITION.

If we carefully read Genesis 1:3-5 to see the function of this FIRST LIGHT and compare it with Genesis 1:14-19 there will be no doubt that this second LIGHT actually comes to PERFORM the functions of the FIRST LIGHT.

To answer your question, since the second Light came to perform the functions of the FIRST light and this first Light having no POSITION or been described in form of an object, then we can conclude that THIS LIGHT ACTUALLY PROJECTED OUT from NON POSITIONAL object SOURCE which its removal might not necessarily need to be considered.

Actually nowhere Bible later said the light was removed but common logic can tell us that since the second light has come to carry out the function of the first light. the first must surely not need to be there anymore.

I'm still a fallible and limited minded man trying to discern the mind of an infallible and unlimited mind of God.

I will happily welcome any of your view about my post


Shalom!


(I'm sorry if my post is too lengthen)

I've read through this thread and I see what you're driving at but I've to come back to this post. In fact I like the way two of you have been keeping it cool from start.

Dapo777:
Ok in the book of Genesis 1:3-4
And God said let there be light and there was light. God saw that the light was good and he separated the light from darkness.

You should have started it from verse 2 so that the understanding of what verse 3 is pointing will be cleared.

"And the earth was waste and void; [size=14pt]and darkness was upon the face of the deep:[/size] and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." Gen 1:2 ASV

@bolded-Darkness was on the face of the deep, what God did is to illuminate the surrounding by bringing out "LIGHT" and mind you no where Bible later says this particular LIGHT was remained after the creation.

Now What this obviously means is that God created visible light before creating the sun because not in anywhere in verse one or two was the creation of sun mentioned.

So the light that God created where is it today?
This is where I see the misunderstanding of the scriptures because this particular light never HAVE A POSITION or physical representative object, so this should shows that God only bring out this LIGHT to start His work and LATER USED THE SUN TO REPLACE and continue the functionality of the FIRST LIGHT.

Since it is not possible to have visible light through natural means without the sun ,and If you mention Aurora, Aurora is caused by geomagnetic disturbances, I presume When God created the earth it was perfect,So having geomagnetic disturbances is ruled out,because the presence of Aurora doesn't support a "perfect" earth as God created it in the beginning.

I don't have much to say here.

Now that I have established the fact that they can't be light without the sun, Genesis 1:3-4 completely destroys the possibility of the existence of a God creating light before the sun.

Please let's allow Bible to speak for Itself rejecting Bible shouldn't rule out this, God is Light so they can be Light without the Sun and Genesis 1:3 didn't say the LIGHT have a position in fact an open minded reading Genesis 1:14 can see that the actual LIGHT CREATED was to TAKE the PLACE and FUNCTIONALITY of the first light; How?

We read in Gen 1:14 "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years:"

One thing that is very astonished here and made it clear that this LIGHT is to replace and perform the function of the FIRST LIGHT is the underlined because we can see again that this same LIGHT is to divide/separate day and night.

If we can ask, how many time then God divided DAY and NIGHT?

If will should follow your assumption our answer will be TWO TIMES, but an open minded person can conclude that THE SECOND LIGHT of Genesis 1:14 is to take the position and functionality of the FIRST LIGHT of Genesis 1:3.

So Gen 1:3 is just a light that God used to begin His work which later replaced by permanent one in Gen 1:14

I'm not given this answer to what science says about our universe BUT the way we should allow Bible to speak for Itself.

Comparison between Muhammad and Paul

http://www.answer-islam.org/PaulandMuhammad.html

yazach:
Lol Sheu Emusan, we muslim understand all ways of reciting the Qura'an so stop deceiving your self

Who says you people didn't understand the way of reciting your book, this shows that you don't know what you're talking about.

You accused Christians of not possessing THE ORIGINAL Bible which I go ahead to tell you that, you Muslims also don't have the original Quran but the copy of it.

So how does your statement address my post?

Ignorant is at work here.

yazach:
@red, prove ne wrong

because you are not carrying the Uthamic manuscripts but copy from it. so saying you have original Quran it's a lie from the pit of hell.#

@blue, but you can set your eyes on the original language in which it was revealed.

Yes Quran in Arabic full market.
Do you want to tell me that no Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Bible that you can purchase in the market?

So where is the bible written in its original language

If you're serious check here http://www.bmsoftware.co.uk/bibleworks7.htm and stop confusing people just because you want to propagate Islam.

Stop lying again.

did you even understand the language?

I don't need to understand it, it's left for you to question Allah why people must learn one particular language in other to serve him.
To me Yahweh had already prophecy that time is coming that people will worship God in their respects languages but in one accord.
So to read Bible in one language is to deny the prophecy of God.

The fact that you people neglect understanding the language makes you easy to be deceived

Nobody neglect original language the Bible was written, IT JUST THAT IT'S NOT COMPULSORY/MANDATORY by Yahweh like Allah made Quran mandatory in Arabic.

If they neglect, it how do will have Bible in over 1000 different Languages? Which means many people have studied the various languages that were used to write Bible.

So don't dive into what you don't know or stop intentionally lying for the propagation of Islam.

Instead of you Muslims to be thanking Christian for taking the first step to translate Quran into English because it was Christian who force Islamic scholars to begin to translate Quran into English and other Languages.

Go back to that link I gave and read it properly, Ok!

Abuamam:
We do not hold the companions of the prophet (saw) as infallible. Some of them were converted jews/ christians and attempted to understand the Qur'an from their own perspective.

some of them were Jews/Christians and they can still be given true statement about Paul

I can see you NEGLECTED the part that says MUHAMMAD HIMSELF said "God has sent me (Muhammad) to all men, so take a message from me, God have mercy on you. Do not hang back from me as the disciples hung back from Jesus son of Mary. They asked how they hung back and he said, ‘He called them to a task similar to that which I have called you. Those who had to go a short journey were pleased and accepted. Those who had a long journey before them were displeased and refused to go, and Jesus complained of them to God. (T. From that very night) every one of them was able to speak the language of the people to whom he was sent.’ (T. Jesus said, ‘This is a thing that God has determined that you should do, so go.’)

“Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage and Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas.” (Ibid. p. 653; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Unless if you want to tell us that THEY DIDN'T hear Muhammad making this claim or they erroneously apply this statement to Muhammad.

so saying a companion could be wrong in his opinion is not blasphemous.

Then The Quran you have now will also wrong because this same companions were the one who preserve it after Muhammad's death.

They were human like us and humans err.

Yet you believe human that can err can preserve Quran without error.

Besides, 'those companions' you mentioned were only a handful.

Really? So because it turns the table towards Islam they are now handful, so what assurance do you have on their work over Quran if they were only handful?

What we understand was that ibn Ishaq believes it was their opinion. Maybe, maybe not. Ibn Katheer has destroyed that hypothesis in his tafseer of Surah 36:14.

So the Muhammad's word for word they sited was also their opinion, keep it coming.

Secondly, even Alfred Guillame (a missionary famous for malicious translations of muslim works) admits in his introduction that Ibn Ishaq would frequently introduce his opinion, and sometimes (unverified) narrations into his seerah. The presence of unauthentic narrations in the seerah of ibn Ishaq was understood by muslim scholars from the early days.

Was the Muhammad statement also Ibn Ishaq opinion?

Ibn Ishaq was incidentally not a companion.

Typical Muslim denying their true man.

Thirdly the verse 36:14-29, continues to say that the city was eventually destroyed. There is no evidence that this ever happened to Antioch post-christian era, and Abdullah Yusuf Ali in his commentary noted that, based on Ibn Katheer's arguments, he rejected the identification with Antioch.

Why can't you quote the Yusuf Ali foot note so that everybody can see it THIS IS THE SAME THING THAT HAPPENED in the two links you gave they just talk without any support.

Imam al tha'laabi is noted for his use of israeeliyat (non muslim) sources in his book "Stories of the prophets". Of course some of those sources were christian, and those ones would have endorsed Paul.

Even if this man is using Christian it's not his fault, it's the fault of the author of Quran who always left incomplete information after the book claim to be well detailed. Example is this Sura 36:14-29, here two people were sent, and been strengthen by third person THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WITH NAME WHO ACTUALLY LIVE BEFORE THIS STORY WAS NARRATED BY Allah, how can Allah narrate an historical event and couldn't mention the name of the people, did Allah not know their name?

Without consulting Christian/Jews book many stories in Quran are meaningless and doesn't make sense at all.

Nevertheless, don't tell me you want diminish the effort of this man in Islam. That reminds me when one of your brother one time ago rubbish Yusuf Ali just because he wants to defend the verse that says "Muslims must enter hell".

He merely compiled those stories of prophets as narrated by them without attempting to distinguish between what was authenticated by the prophet (saw) or not.

What of the word for word of the prophet in the above quote, was it fabricated?

His Qisas al anbiyaa is not considered a serious work. Fantasy abounds, and it is extremely difficult reading for any serious scholar. Incidentally, Imam al tha'labi was also not a companion.

So who was he?

You can learn more about these relatively meager and weak items of 'evidence' on
http://ebrahimsaifuddin./2007/09/09/is-paul-a-prophet-according-to-quran/

Actually what this site was saying it that Paul's name never appeared in the verse that some commentators believe it talks about Paul but I'm not here for that in fact no disciple of Jesus' name appear in the Quran BUT my main concern is WHAT THE EARLY MUSLIMS COMMENTATOR BELIEVES about Paul?

http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2005/paul-of-tarsus-the-false-apostle-according-to-islam/

When I saw this link I thought I will see where Quran mention Paul's name as corrupter of Christianity or says something similar but what the author did is not but biting around the bush, in fact it's like the author copy Nisar the rebuttal of link I provided in my first post.

The question will need to ask ourselves is, did Allah not aware that Paul has corrupted the teaching of Jesus and Allah couldn't mention Paul's name just for once throughout Quran?

For a more comprehensive understanding of the muslim perspective on christian history, Ibn Taimiyyah's book... "The correct response concerning those who changed the faith taught by the Messiah". I am not too sure if there is a translation though.

Is it Muslims that suppose to be given their own perspective about Christian's history something that would have given Allah and Muhammad great prestige if everything was well detailed in the Quran?

What you will see the Muslims do is using the same Bible to condemn this faithful Apostles who were eyes witness and received direct revelation from God.

Rilwayne001:
Islam does'nt recognise paul as an apostle of christ.
Same way Jesus never recognised him.

This is Sam Shamoun's reply to Nisar here: http://www.answer-islam.org/Stpaulandislam.html

You and other bias Muslims may not recognise the Apostleship of Paul but the FIRST Muslims commentators do.

Unless you want to tell us that all these Muhammad's companions are wrong

<so We reinforced them with a third> means, ‘We supported and strengthened them with a third Messenger.’ Ibn Jurayj narrated from Wahb bin Sulayman, from Shu’ayb Al-Jaba’i, “The names of the first two Messengers were Sham’un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was BULUS, and the city was Antioch…

<Verily, we have been sent to you as Messengers.>

meaning, ‘from your Lord Who created you and Who commands you to worship Him Alone with no partners or associates.’ This was the view of Abu Al-‘Aliyah. Qatadah bin Di‘amah claimed that they were MESSENGERS of the Messiah, peace be upon him, sent to the people of Antioch. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Volume 8, Surat Al-Ahzab, Verse 51 to the end of Surat Ad-Dukhan, abridged under a group of scholars under the supervision of Shaykh Safiur Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors Riyadh, Houston, New York, London, Lahore; First Edition, September 2000], p. 179; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Sham’un refers to Simon Peter, Yuhanna to the apostle John, and Bulus is Arabic for Paul.

In Alfred Guillaume's translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasulullah titled The Life of Muhammad (Oxford University Press Karachi) we find the following positive endorsement of Paul:

“God has sent me (Muhammad) to all men, so take a message from me, God have mercy on you. Do not hang back from me as the disciples hung back from Jesus son of Mary. They asked how they hung back and he said, ‘He called them to a task similar to that which I have called you. Those who had to go a short journey were pleased and accepted. Those who had a long journey before them were displeased and refused to go, and Jesus complained of them to God. (T. From that very night) every one of them was able to speak the language of the people to whom he was sent.’ (T. Jesus said, ‘This is a thing that God has determined that you should do, so go.’)

“Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage and Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas.” (Ibid. p. 653; bold and capital emphasis ours)

Other Muslim sources that affirm the preceding statement include:

“Among the apostles and those disciples around them, whom Jesus sent out, there were Peter and his companion Paul.” (Thalabii, Qisas al-Anbiyaa, pp. 389-390)

And,

“Among the apostles, and the followers who came after them were the Apostle Peter and Paul who was a follower and not an apostle; they went to Rome. Andrew and Matthew were sent to the country whose people are man-eaters, a land of blacks, we think; Thomas was sent to Babylonia in the east, Philip to Qayrawan (and) Carthage, that is, North Africa. John went to Ephesus, the city of the youths of the cave, and James to Jerusalem, that is, Aelia. Bartholomew was sent to Arabia, namely, the Hijaz; Simeon to the land of the Berbers in Africa. Judas was not then an apostle, so his place was taken by Ariobus. He filled in for Judas Iscariot after the latter had perpetrated his deed.” (History, Volume IV, p. 123; bold emphasis ours)

frank317:
U have written almost a text book , yet no answer to a simple yes , no, or I dont know question

I don't know how you people read someone's post, this is the first statement in my post you quoted

"You and honourhim still have the same problem "poor comprehension" sorry to say this because a person with high comprehension CAN READ THROUGH MY POSTS THAT I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION [size=14pt]as YES[/size] with additional fact to buttress it.

So what do you understand in this statement?

dp

bingbagbo:
john chapter 1:10 states " he was in the world, and the world was made by him, but the world did not recognize him"....who is this scripture talking about?

In fact John 1:10 is not the best reference but John 1:3

For you to see how flaw the JWs teaching is read the John 1:3 and Colossians 1:15-18 in their own Bible.

Here is John 1:3 in their own Bible
"All things were created through him(The word/Christ), apart from him (The Word/Christ) NOT EVEN ONE THING CAME INTO EXISTENCE, what has come into existence" NWT

Let's break this verse down @underlined:
1) APART from Him:--- This means that NOTHING was created that didn't pass through Christ.

2) NOT EVEN ONE THING CAME INTO EXISTENCE:--- In fact this is more interesting because NO CREATURE CAME INTO EXISTENCE except through Christ this means it was Christ who brought every CREATURE INTO EXISTENCE.

3) What HAS COME into existence:--- This further support that NO CREATURE THAT EXISTED except through Christ.


YET this same JWs who render this beautiful verse like this can still say Jesus is the FIRST CREATURE OF GOD.

After reading this verse one can conclude that Jesus is the one who created Himself according to JWs.

johnydon22:
lol bros forget the response above just yes or no and i will be ok... why is it hard for you to say yes or no I WONDER hehehehehe

You and honourhim still have the same problem "poor comprehension" sorry to say this because a person with high comprehension CAN READ THROUGH MY POSTS THAT I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION as YES with additional fact to buttress it.

For you to come back and asked me to say YES/NO is pathetic.

I know what you want after I answer Yes is to ask "then why did God create Lucifer again since God knows Lucifer will rebel?"

But I've encoded everything in my previous post even the question you haven't ask.

Or if I say NO then you will say God is not omniscient.

This is the summary of my previous post:

God wants to create and God did create everything including BEINGS that will possess A MIND and EVERY BEING THAT POSSESSED MIND must also have the POWER OF REASON if not the MIND WILL BE USELESS and God knows that this power of reason can be misused THOUGH GOD STILL WENT AHEAD TO CREATE but God also placed commandment/rule/law to follow in other not to overuse this ability.

Here my explanation didn't stop on Lucifer alone but ALL CREATED BEING WITH MIND because some Angels even Adam are Vitim of it.

I guess you want to know whether God single handedly know Lucifer will rebel and still goes ahead to create him; that one is sure! because EVERYTHING CREATED BY God HAVE THEIR own PURPOSE of been created the rebellion of Lucifer to become an OPPOSITION shouldn't rule out the purpose God created him for before the fall.

God knows that the WHOLE world won't accept the sacrifice of Jesus YET He goes further to send Jesus TO DIE FOR THE SIN OF THE WORLD, does it mean the purpose of sending Jesus won't be achieved?

Yes it will be achieved even NOT THE WHOLE world that Jesus died for will accept Him.


Shalom!

The awesome God will perform His wonder in your life in Jesus name.

For those who have in one way or the other taken the step of brotherly love to help DJDOLA, blessing of God will never depart from you all. Amen!

mcfynest:
HHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

johnydon22:
No i need a specific answer...DID GOD KNOW LUCIFER WILL TURN BAD BEFORE CREATING HIM ?? just answer YES or NO...no more long talks... just answer me yes or no shikena

See my respond above

honourhim:
Your explanations are not wrong bro. What i mean by specific is to give a yes or no answer as he has indicated below.

Is like the same thing is affecting two of you.

So you just want me to say Yes/No; when my post has already answered that.

No wonder people who profess themselves to be wise became the opposite.

honourhim:
Bro I think he wants you to be more specifc in answering the quesion he asked.

These are the two statements he made.

so when God created lucifer he didnt know
lucifer would turn bad

i think you are actually telling us God didnt
know that particular angel lucifer would rebel
or turn bad right?

So how can a rational being still made these statements after reading something like this?

God wants to create and He did create all things BUT HE ALSO WANTS TO CREATE beings that have MIND and it's not possible to create a being that have MIND without having POWER OF REASONING but in other for each being not to MISUSE THE ABILITY OF REASONING God also placed a COMMAND. God knows we can misuse this ABILITY OF REASONING that's why he placed commandment in between.

To ask why God create Day Star or Adam after He knows that they will disobey Him? Is to ask why God brought everything into existence in the first place?

Lastly, God wants to create and He created but it's not possible for God to create a being with MIND without having POWER OF REASONING that will make the MIND useless and WITHOUT MIND Angels and MAN are like A ROBOT.

And you still want me to be specific, specific on what?

OK let me put it this way, God created Lucifer WITH ABILITY OF REASONING because Lucifer has A MIND likewise other Angels & Man and God knows that Lucifer can misuse this POWER OF REASONING but every created BEINGS that have MIND also have COMMANDMENTS TO FOLLOW IN OTHER NOT TO MISUSE IT.

Hope it's cleared now?

yazach:
Although, I will not like you to change the topic but I will still answer you since you have no answer for the reason why the Original bible is not in circulation(Note: That means you are not a good researcher)

Another lie, when will Muslims stop lying for the sake of Islam.

What is the meaning of translate?

If I say 'Ekale' in Yoruba and an English man translated it to 'Good evening', does it mean that the English man didn't read the original meaning of Ekale in Yoruba?

Answer to your question
Just to protect its authenticity

Yet the first copy collected were burnt.

All the ORIGINAL Bible MANUSCRIPTS IN POSSESSION TODAY WERE OLDER THAN MUHAMMAD, so which one is more authentic?

If anybody gives you a disgusting translation, you can just try and learn the language then you know if he is lying or not and this makes the Qur'an unique in its understanding

We have many Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Aramaic Bible today so what is the point?

Remember Muslim scholars first rejected translation of Qur'an into other languages that's why you will find Qur'an mostly in Arabic EVEN TILL NOW MOST MUSLIMS STILL BELIEVE THAT READING QUR'AN IN ANOTHER LANGUAGE IS NOT THE BEST they believe it is best in its mother tongue which is Arabic.

Yet those Arabic Qur'an are not the EXERT MANUSCRIPT of Uthman's copy BUT A COPY THAT HAS BEEN rendered to fit for reading where some CONJUNCTION, DEFINITE article, INDEFINITE articles e.t.c were added to make it more sounds to read.

Rilwayne001:
LMAO
Guess someone is scared to see [size=14pt]how errant the book called bible is[/size] .

Another time you will display your ignorant is d bolded part, how can an errant book called Bible still contain the prophecy of Muhammad?

Have you finally made up your mind that Muhammad is no where to be found in Bible? (even though is not actually there)

If I'll scare not with the Word of God called Bible but something I don't have any clue about.

I just don't have time for old bullshit.

I'll ask this question for the last time, are there contradictions and errors in the bible or not?

For the last time, how can a contradictory book prophecy the coming of Muhammad?

Please answer this^^ question...

please do answer my question...

I can't remember reading any shabir alli 101 contradictions, and i'm not copying any article for you

You can't remember but you aware of his book with that title.

why are you scared, Just answer my question...biko

why are you scared? Just answer my question...
You called it scared but the truth is I don't have time for RECYCLING subject.

I'm still coming back to this but please answer my question.

Are there not contradictions in the bible?

please do answer my question, how can a contradictory book prophecy the coming of Muhammad?

You don't get me at all

yazach:
This is not a Joke o broz. It is a matter that needs serious thinking.

Then you're a liar

Why have I not set my eyes on the Original Bible?

Neither I set my eyes on the original Qur'an.

yazach:
Shehu Emusan(Drink Orange in youruba lang) by the time you gather 10 Qura'an together, you will see 7 of its original language

But bible chai chai hypocrisy of the highest order

I know you're just joking and this shows how truth is far from you!

Rilwayne001:


I asked the question first, please answer my question and lets start from there

I don't need to answer you because I know the next thing to do is to go and do copy and paste of Shabih Alli "101 contradictions in the Bible"

But my point here is how can a rational mind believe a book that contains a lot of contradictions ALSO still believe THE SAME BOOK CONTAINS THE PROPHECY OF THEIR PROPHET.

Doesn't this show how Muslims reason?

In your first post you asked, who wrote the CHAPTER the OP quoted?

By saying CHAPTER; it shows how dubious you are because YOU INTENTIONALLY DID IT in other not to condemned the rest of John's book because YOU STILL BELIEVE John chapter 14, 16 contain the prophecy of Muhammad so you can conclude that John chapter 1 is forgery whereas John 14, 16 that contain Muhammad prophecy (according to you) is not forgery.

SMH.

Rilwayne001:
Simple question:

Are there not contradictions in the bible?

Simple question:

can a contradicted book still speak about the coming of Muhammad

yazach:
Now the question is:
why are we not having the original bible with its original language in the circulation as you have the translated ones?

Does Quran also circulate in its original Arabic language the way translated one does?

You can't pick the log in your own eyes but busy seeing someone's else own.

Rilwayne001:
how does asking question turns lying

Are there not contradictions in the bible

e-diot

Funny dude!

You believe Bible contradicts and the same time prophesy the coming of Muhammad, what are you displaying?

Ignorance!

johnydon22:
i think you are actually telling us God didnt know that particular angel lucifer would rebel or turn bad right

Your problem is pathetic if you can't find my two post comprehensive enough to digest by asking this question.

Rilwayne001:
Just shut your fvcking mouth.... okay

I never quoted you here, did i?....

Must you?

Stop lying in Christian post OK!

johnydon22:
first of all lucifer is the latin word for morning star or day star as you called it.
so when God created lucifer he didnt know lucifer would turn bad

Your problem is pathetic if you can't find my two post comprehensive enough to digest by asking this question.

honourhim:
@Emusan,

A few questions for you my brother.

1. Do you believe that God sees the end from the beginning as the bible said?

2. If your answer to question one is yes then does that not mean that he was aware that Lucifer will rebel before creating him?

3. If he was aware, why then did he create him?

Had it been that you read my post above you wouldn't have asked this question.

God wants to create and He did create all things BUT HE ALSO WANTS TO CREATE beings that have MIND and it's not possible to create a being that have MIND without having POWER OF REASONING but in other for each being not to MISUSE THE ABILITY OF REASONING God also placed a COMMAND.

God knows we can misuse this ABILITY OF REASONING that's why he placed commandment in between.

To ask why God create Day Star or Adam after He knows that they will disobey Him? Is to ask why God brought everything into existence in the first place?

Lastly, God wants to create and He created but it's not possible for God to create a being with MIND without having POWER OF REASONING that will make the MIND useless and WITHOUT MIND Angels and MAN are like A ROBOT.


Come Lord Jesus!

Rilwayne001:
With all the contradictions in it?

Yet the same book that full with contradictions still prophesy the coming of Muhammad or Muhammad's name can still be found on it.

Confuse fellow!

johnydon22:
so God created the beautiful angel lucifer so he can turn bad, and he will send him down to earth and later on you blame lucifer for all his misdeeds... who will you blame the car that hit someone or the person driving review all this and tell me how it corresponds with God being all good, all loving, all merciful, all just and loves man so much...its impossible

And you said you're born again YET what you're doing is nothing but using your mind of Atheism to conflict the reveal word of God--BIBLE.

Now let me enlighten you small.

Firstly, God didn't create Lucifer/Satan what God created was 'DAY STAR' it was Day Star who turned himself to Satan/Lucifer. Satan/Lucifer simply means OPPOSITION, so it was Day Star's action that made him became OPPOSITION.

"Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, [size=14pt]till unrighteousness was found in thee...,[/size] Thy heart was lifted up because of thy beauty; thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I have cast thee to the ground; I have laid thee before kings, that they may behold thee. Ezek 28:15, 17

As you claimed God didn't create Day Star so that he CAN TURN BAD, know this that all creation of God that have MIND were created with POWER OF REASONING and when Day Star put his own POWER OF REASONING into action beyond his limit by lusted after his POWER and BEAUTY he became OPPOSITION, HOW?

He forgot that he is a created being so he wants to put himself in the position of God even the higher position above God.

Secondly, you want to know why God cast Satan to Earth and not another planet or destroy Satan at once!
Know this first that Bible may used Earth for where Satan was cast to but it doesn't necessarily mean that it was only planet Earth the BIBLE says Satan found no place no more in heaven and he was cast down.

Now let's look at Day Star challenges before he was cast down;
"And thou saidst in thy heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; and I will sit upon the mount of congregation, in the uttermost parts of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High. Isa 14:13-14

We find two things very astonished in this passage;
1. This evil desire was still IN THE HEART of Day Star
2. Day Star said he will SIT UPON THE MOUNT OF CONGREGATION, which congregation is he talking about?
This congregation can't be the Angels.

Now after all these challenges if God destroyed Day Star instantly the rest of the Angels MIGHT THINK God is unjust for destroying Day Star for no reason, so what God can do is to allow enough time to pass so that DAY STAR can prove all what he thinks in his heart BUT NOT IN HEAVEN because the Lord can not dwell with iniquity.

So God hurled Satan to the lower part of heaven where Angels and Man can see for themselves whether Day Star can meet all his challenges.

You may ask, didn't God know that Day Star will become unrighteous/Satan before He created him?
Yes God knows that Day Star will become OPPOSITION because God didn't create any being that has MIND to be ROBOT but they all posses the POWER OF REASONING and for a creature with POWER OF REASONING not to over use this ability God also placed a COMMAND.

I can't go full detail about this...but I hope this will help a little.

Understanding how Day Star became an opposition against the perfect creation of God and how God handle the situation helps believers to trust more in God for His justice, God is not an Unjust God He will always deal with us just fully.

I'm a fallible man with a limited mind trying to discern an infallible and unlimited mind of God, my post is opened to correction.

In the service of our dear Lord I remain...come Lord Jesus!