F00028's Posts
Nairaland Forum › F00028's Profile › F00028's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (of 39 pages)
[quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]Well, as you said ‘muslims don‘t consider bible as the word of God‘, since you don‘t consider it as the word of God, isn‘t it demeaning for you to pick some texts( no matter who is believed to be the speaker) and make use of it?[/quote]I said, we do not consider the bible, as a whole the word of God. [quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]Having said that, the word ‘mushlam‘ actually means ‘spiritually perfect‘ and not in anyway referring to muslims as a regilion/sect.[/quote]but Jesus Christ never said, ‘spiritually perfect‘ or even the greek, 'teleios'. if he spoke aramaic he said 'mushlam'. [quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]Besides, what assurance do you have that ‘mushlam‘ is the only aramaic word which has the same meaning as ‘perfect‘ since Jesus could have used any of those other words.[/quote]you have evidence for this? |
[quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]Well, I believe muslims don‘t believe in the bible, therefore anything you want to use to support your claim about Jesus should not be taken from the bible.[/quote]Muslims believe in the exact revelation God gave Jesus not the gospel according to mark or john. if they are the words of Jesus, they are scripture. though the bible does contain the words of the Prophets it also contains the wrods of other people, anonymous even. so as a whole we do not consider the bible as the word of God. [quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]As for the language, Jesus wasn‘t the one who ‘wrote‘ the gospel of luke himself, hence the language he spoke during his time doesn‘t matter(in the case of this gospel) since the original writer wrote in another language; what matters is the meaning of the word in the original text of the original writer.[/quote]no, what matters are the exact words spoken by Jesus. things get lost in translation all the time. and a person's background, experiences, education, perspective, etc easily influence his translation/interpretation. |
[quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]@op .. Is it necessary for you to bring christianity into the picture for you to validate your believe in islam?[/quote]not christianity, Jesus Christ. [quote author=Alaafia l‘oro]Well, gospel of luke was originally written in greek koine,a dialect in attic greek. So tell me how an aramaic word is going to validate the use of the word ‘mushlam‘ or whatever it is?[/quote]I wonder why that is. Jesus didn't speak greek. |
Luke 6:40 (KJV): The disciple is not above his master: but everyone that is perfect shall be as his master. however in aramaic the bolded word is actually : "Ein talmeed na'leh 'al rabbo; shekken kal adam she' MUSHLAM yihyeh k'rabbo." The most accurate and honest translation for the Aramaic 'mushlam' is none other than the Arabic, 'muslim'. The Hebrew word "mushlam" comes from the root "Sh L M". "Shalom" which comes from the same root means "peace". The Arabic word "muslim" comes from the root "S L M". "Salam" means "peace". "Salem" means "safe". see the Aramaic bible society , http://home.comcast.net/ ~rzuberi/ index_files/page0005.htm , and http:// home.comcast.net/~rzuberi/articles/ Being_Like_The_Teacher.pdf . |
Chedarking: Still no answer from plaetton......I, plaetton, have FAITH in them |
@frosbel, plaetton, chedarking on the scientific method: Professor Richard Lewontin, a Harvard geneticist, admitted in the New York Review in January 1997: "Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to the understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science, in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. " |
2good: Atheism is different from evolution theory. Not every Atheist have absolute believe in evolution. Just want to clarify that so ask more reasonable questions next timeso how do those unbelieving atheists think we got here then? |
ezme: Putting faith and atheism in one sentence really got me confused. Do atheists have a common belief system or they just reject the existence of a supreme being as many religion tend to project? What is the basis for the atheist's argument? Is it logic or faith?blind faith! cos going thru this thread, its definitely not logic |
650/p.a |
"Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), St. Paul was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament." |
[quote author=Bélla3]If by influential you mean, being able to make others commit suicide and kill innocent... Muhammed ofcourse![/quote]History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam a the point of a sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated. -De lacy O’Leary “Islam at the crossroads” pg.8 |
I have a two bedroom, two toilet, tiled floors, interlocked drive in flat for rent in kubuwa. Anyone looking? |
[quote author=Atheist:-D]Now it isnt. The evidence for Gods existence is pretty much nonsense. Read the bible and kuran... you will understand me.[/quote]When we reflect upon our own existence we will come to the realisation, that at some point in time, we began to exist. Since we were once non-existent and are now in existence, it follows that we must have had a beginning. In light of this, the Qur’an raises some profound questions: were we created by nothing? Did we create ourselves? Or did we create the universe? (Quran 52:35-36) These questions can be addressed to the existence of everything temporal, in other words the entire universe. Therefore, the exegetical implications of these verses can be logically formulated in the following way: Things that began to exist were either:- 1. Created or brought into being from nothing 2. Self caused or self created 3. Created or brought into being by something else that began to exist 4. Created or brought into being by a non- created or un-caused entity Before we proceed, the first presupposition has to be subtantiated, as it forms the basis for the Qur’an’s argument for the existence of God. http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/philosophy-theology/the-quranic-argument-for-gods-existence/ |
[quote author=Atheist:-D]Now it isnt. The evidence for Gods existence is pretty much nonsense. Read the bible and kuran... you will understand me.[/quote]When we reflect upon our own existence we will come to the realisation, that at some point in time, we began to exist. Since we were once non-existent and are now in existence, it follows that we must have had a beginning. In light of this, the Qur’an raises some profound questions: were we created by nothing? Did we create ourselves? Or did we create the universe? (Quran 52:35-36) These questions can be addressed to the existence of everything temporal, in other words the entire universe. Therefore, the exegetical implications of these verses can be logically formulated in the following way: Things that began to exist were either:- 1. Created or brought into being from nothing 2. Self caused or self created 3. Created or brought into being by something else that began to exist 4. Created or brought into being by a non- created or un-caused entity Before we proceed, the first presupposition has to be subtantiated, as it forms the basis for the Qur’an’s argument for the existence of God. http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/essays-articles/philosophy-theology/the-quranic-argument-for-gods-existence/ |
enilove: The quran makes is clear that it is not God that gave the quran to muhammed in sura 2:3.It says "we "bestowed upon them. have you never wondered why your brethren, the arab trinitarian christians have not been shouting themselves silly about this since God revealed the Qur'an?eastern languages like Arabic and Hebrew have two types of plurals: -plural of numbers, and -plural of respect. so, a proclamation beginning with "we" doesn't mean it is made by more than one person. enilove: Why was the quran not compiled by muhamed into a bookwhy was the bible not compiled by Jesus in book form? why was nothing written down while he was around? why did the first books of the nt only appear decades after he had left? if the writers were really inspired why were they copying each other? if the book is really from God why are you freely tampering with it? |
enilove: There are so many wrong things about islam which I wrote, but you have deliberately negnected them and resort to saying there are contradictions in the bible ,which if you look intently are not contradictions .if this was adressed to me you haven't answered any of my queries what makes you think I'll answer yours? and when you say "the christianity was spread by preaching and signs and wonders blah blah blah..." are you that ignorant of the blood stained history of christianity or do you think I am? |
Yooguyz: guy i have proof for all the above, they're all online, but it seems like you looking for who would engage you in a battle of wits. BTW even if i wrote the truth down clearly you still not agree with me because you are blind! And i won't waste my energy typing to someone who has already made up his mind on what he wants to belief plus am scared i don't wana be another casualty of boko-araamjust run little boy, run! |
Yooguyz: the bible does teach that the earth is round infact "pillars of the earth"refer to the earth's lithospherethen congratulations! you just found another contradiction! your bible says the earth has four corners. and yes it’s a figure of speech now but it wasn’t when the your bible was written. Yooguyz: the differences in age in 2kings8:26, 2chor 22:2 was due to copyist error infact NASB translation corrected that error but that does not mean the bible contradicts itselfhmmm….what about: -the bible says God incited David to count Israel (2Samuel24:1) but in 1 Chronicles21:1 is says satan incited David. -it says: God is not a man that he should repent (Numb. 23:19); but in Exodus 32:14 it says God REPENTED! -in Exodus 33:20, God declares no man sees Him and live! But Moses saw him “face-to-face” (Exodus33:11) and did Aaron and seventy others (Exodus 24:10), not forgetting Jacob too (Genesis 32:30) -Genesis 25:1 describes Keturah as Abraham’s WIFE; but 1 Chronicles says she is a CONCUBINE (or do ‘wife’ and ‘concubine’ mean the same thing?) - no man has ever ascended heaven in John 3:13; but I have already read that Elijah had ascended (2 Kings2:11) and so has Enoch (Genesis 5:24). |
all4naija: I am on about protection on normal circumstances. Why would you have a baby in your back doing your chores, if not for those who like stressful jobs? Kindly put the baby in baby carriage close by. Comeon!some people can't help it. |
Reyginus: Too hot for me? You want me murder you and them?shut up and just bring it! ![]() keep it short and to the point. |
Yooguyz: on the contrary you don't know about the bible cos if you did, you would have provided proof for the nonsense you wrote above.e.gs contradictions- Ahaziah was 22 when he became king in 2kings 8:26, but 2Chronicles says he was 42 incomprehensible doctrines: trinity original sin (keep in mind Exekiel 18:20, Mark 10:14-15; 18:14; Luke 18:17) scientific absurdites: F00028: This is what I said the bible teaches:am on the move but if you like I'll give you a lot more when I get to my computer. |
bigfat03: that means the white man is so daft when he invented baby carrier .why dont you use chewing stick instead of tooth brushwhy not? |
[quote author=Table Leg ]Topic... Ok.. But i will carry my baby whichever way i want to![/quote]think of the baby |
Yooguyz: all what you just wrote about the bible are all lies, what proof do you have for the above? you dont really read the bible, do you? |
Reyginus: Moderators, please move this garbage to the garbage can, where khomeni can thereafter hide this post.wassamatter? too hot for ya? |
"Parents should shun prams and copy primitive tribes by carrying their babies upright so they develop more quickly, a leading scientist has said." Pulitzer prize-winning Professor Jared Diamond insisted parents should learn from traditional child-rearing techniques. “Different societies have been raising their children differently for a long time and we can see the results,” he said. “I have worked with traditional New Guinea peoples for 50 years.... more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/369087/The-best-way-to-carry-your-baby first reason: https://www.nairaland.com/1155601/one-more-reason-go-traditional
|
enilove: 2-By reading the book whether holy or not given you as the book of God.so when you read your bible and find that it is full of internal contradictions, scientific absurdities, historical inaccuracies, incomprehensible doctrines, racist ideologies,even Indecency what do you do? |
[quote author=Mr_Anony]...As a biologist, he is probably brilliant but when it comes to arguing about God, he is more or less a dunce. In the circle of philosophers, he is the equivalent of Kim Kardashian/Paris Hilton......All Noise and No Brilliance.[/quote]not taking any prisioners today, are you, Anony? yes, logic I've been following from the beginning. |
[quote author=p.wiz]For fear of theft. Even at the look of that backgrounf. You can see its a ghetto...[/quote] if he/she can afford that car why us he/ she still living there? |
Bidam: funny you should call me dat..if someone doesn't accept ur views dis is wat u resort to..oya no vex..hope ur blood no dey boil sha cos from ur post i know if u see me na murder go be the next thing for ur mind..take it eazy..i have not replied ur post yet am coming to that..i was just respondin(my opinions..and i think am entitled to it)to my broda's post ok..wen sweetnecta was insulting paul the Apostle no one said anything..so abeg take am Eazy...lollol... I meant @Bidam, @The Clown I was addressing the question to both y'all no vex. |
@bidam, the clown if Muhammad (pbuh) was false a prophet how come it is not his book but your bible that is full of internal contradictions, scientific absurdities, historical inaccuracies, incomprehensible doctrines, racist ideologies,even pornography? ![]() |
Bidam: i have answered the other post quite clearly and succinctly..it's like we are going round in circle..I hate circles too. what about this: "According to the Bible, our brother mammal, the bat, is a bird. This one has been debated through e-mail quite a bit, but if one looks in Leviticus 11:13 a list of Fowls is started, and the Bat is included in this list in Leviticus 11:19" "The locust, grasshopper, and beetle all have four feet according to Leviticus 11:22 , then in the next verse, it mentions a group of flying animals with four feet. I can't think of any." |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 (of 39 pages)
have you never wondered why your brethren, the arab trinitarian christians have not been shouting themselves silly about this since God revealed the Qur'an?