₦airaland Forum

sameera025:
This thread was meant to be a peaceful one for me to have civil discussions with my Christian neighbors who have questions about Islam. I opened up my story and have answered a number of questions but I think at this point it has just turned into a thread of insults. I would just like to say one last time that Islam and terrorism is different. Islam teaches peace. Most of us (note that 1.7 billion muslims in the world) believe in peace. To answer the question about the quran being burnt or my prophet being insulted, it makes me unhappy but not angry and violent for I know that this world is but temporary and the best punishment can only come from God. The prophet (saw) spoke of the khawarj "rebels", "terrorists" and called them the dogs of hell fire. Thank you Rich4God and AgentofAllah for your polite discussions. We can use an alternate means of discussing without all the distractions from those who are merely here to insult.

That's what all the Muslims I have debated do.

When I show them from their Quran and their Hadiths that Muhammad did and preached the same beheadings, crucifixions, rape and sale of captives...that ISIS, Boko Haram, Al Qaeda do, they run away under all sorts of pretexts. I for one dont remember insulting you or anyone.

I asked you: do you want me to show evidence from your Quran and Hadiths?

Fortunately, someone has listed some verses:

Sahih Muslim 8:29: “IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH A CAPTIVE WOMAN AFTER SHE IS PURIFIED (OF MENSES OR DELIVERY) IN CASE SHE HAS A HUSBAND, HER MARRIAGE IS ABROGATED AFTER SHE BECOMES CAPTIVE.”
Sahih Muslim 8:3432: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (verse 4:24)" (i.e., they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).”

Qur'an (4:24)-"And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Even sex with married slaves is permissible.

Qur'an (8:69)-"But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good" A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part

Qur'an (33:50)-"O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee"

Qur'an (23:5-6)-"..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..." This verse permits the slave-owner to have sex with his slaves. 

See also Qur'an (70:29-30). The Quran is a small book, so if Allah used valuable space to repeat the same point four times, then sex slavery must be very important to him.

Qur'an (24:32)-"And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves..." Breeding slaves based on fitness.
Qur'an (2:178)-"O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female." The message of this verse, which prescribes the rules of retaliation for murder, is that all humans arenotcreated equal. The human value of a slave is less than that of a free person (and a woman's worth is also distinguished from that of a man's)

They are from your Quran and Hadiths, not our words.

AgentOfAllah:
You're wrong! George Bush justified one of the greatest tragedies of modern history in the name of his god in the name of his god . Yet he invaded the middle east purely for political reasons. The crusaders of yesteryears, remember them? They also committed their crimes in the name of their lord. The Buddhists of Myanmar, they murder Muslims in the name of their religion.

So you have a problem with the crusades?

The Christians should have left the Muslim terrorists to continue to kill and rape Christian and Jewish occupants and pilgrims to the Holy land invaded by Muslims without provocation?

shdemidemi:
Who said they didn't?


You keep running from pillar to post like a colt and a novice about this issue of Paul.

The book of Act of Apostle isn't a doctrinal book but a time when history was unfolding and it was progressive. Your style of seeing the entire book like one big story book you can randomly pick statements that appeal to you from is gateway to error. Paul did not know all he knew the first day he got converted, yet he preached at that time. He was away for three years before after which he came back to present the message of Grace to all.

So Paul was ignorant of what he was saying in Acts?

shdemidemi:
@italo

Are you a sinner?

Yes.

I appreciate Sameera025 sharing her story...but I do not appreciate lies and pretence.

The Quran and Hadiths are awash with passages encouraging the most brutal and heinious atrocities. There is nothing ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram are doing that was not practised by Muhammad himself or preached by him in the Quran and the Hadiths... the beheadings, crucifixions, raping captives (yes, Muhammad did that too), forcing non muslims to leave their land or die or pay a high tax etc.

So my question to you is:

Do you want me to show you evidence?

Jehovah's Witnesses!

Jesus is God because the Bible says so.

No need to ask us questions.

"In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God...

...and the word became flesh and lived amongst us."

PastorKun:
You would have done well to address the religion in question directly and not generalise it to all religions.

If one religion does something bad, these Atheists say all religion is useless...but if one religion does something good, they dont say all religion is good.

If one group of Atheists does something bad, the dont say all Atheism is bad.

Tell me what can be making these Atheists so obviously dishonest, if not satan in them.

esere826:
I couldn't help interjecting abeg no vex

sick is not a verb
it as an adjective

a verb signifies action, eg the boy JUMPS
while an adjective signifies an attribute eg the man is SICK or the dress is RED

Sick is only a verb in UK pidgin (informal English). it is then used like this:
he sicked (i.e. vomitted) in the pub


make all of una suffery dey misyarn oooo

I didn't say "sick" was a verb. I said "sickler" is not from a verb "sick" implying that that was what Goshen360 thought when he likened it to 'sin - sinner,' 'sing - singer,' 'believe - believer.'

Think before you type. Think well.

jnrbayano:
No one is sure.

But remember, it was God who chose Saul, the same God rejected the same Saul whom he chose.

That one sef dey o.

Oceanbreeze07:
Would advice u look up dah definition of infallibility cos thers a lot of perspective as to dah definition of dah word..!!

Could mean * incapable of misleading people or can not be wrong*..!!
These statements r synonyms n cn be very misleading.!!!

The Catholic teaching of infallibility states that the bold is true about the Pope and the Catholic Church in the following conditions:

1. The pronouncement must be made by the official successor to Peter.

2. The subject matter must be in the area of faith and morals.

3. The Pope must be speaking ex cathedra (from the chair) of Peter, and must be intending to proclaim a doctine that binds the entire Church to assent.

Oceanbreeze07:
If the church is infallible, dat means d priest r 2 cos they r d leaders of the church.!!

The Catholic Church doesn't teach that all leaders or priests of the Church are infallible. In fact, even individual bishops are not infallible. The body of bishops however is infallible when it makes a pronouncement in union with the pope...under the conditions stated above.

Priests should draw their teachings from the infallible teachings of the Church.

Do you still have objections or difficulties?

OP thinking like a lady that she is.

Why should I make eye contact, pda and keep close just because she's getting attention?

It achieves nothing.

My style is to remain as if no one is watching.

Goshen360:
@ italo, so you are a sickler because you fall sick? I can't stop laughing over here.... . I know this kind of subject is bigger than some people and they will struggle to handle it....

The subject is truly bigger than people like you who laugh in ignorace because you do not know that the noun "sickler" is not from a verb "sick." It is from the word "sickle" as in "sickle cell."

A person who sins is a sinner. Come up with another ignorant defence.

Olodo.

Oceanbreeze07:
Over the years have hard that d church is above mistake and that even the pop is infallible..
I'm a catholic and I don't think the statement is true.
What do u guys think.??

Nobody teaches that the Church is above mistake.

What the Church teaches is that The Pope and the Catholic Church are infallible.

Infallibility means they cannot teach error because they are prevented from doing so by the Holy Spirit.

Beware that infallibility is very often misunderstood. Please read this link http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility if you still have objections or difficulties, I'll be glad to clarify.

vooks:
I will buy you a dozen boxes of Kleenex since the sight of of a middleaged man crying is disgusting

Define those terms as you wish and answer my question please.

How does knowledge of the audience of Hebrews affect your comprehension of Hebrews 6:4-5

That's a straw man; you are furnished with evidence of a justified shdemidemi perishing and you shout that the audience is Jewish!

So what? You have been busy googling all commentaries and sites that are trying to run away from the solid Revelation of Heb 6 namely believers can fall away and perish.

It is amazing the depths fickle brains will sink to escape the Sword of the Spirit

Are Jews/Hebrews unworthy of hearing the 'true 'gospel of eternal security?

Why should they ALONE be threatened with loss of salvation?

Did Holy Spirit 'forget' to inspire apostles who ministered to Jews with the same formula for salvation as He inspired and taught Paul?

Cc BabaGnoni,ayoku777

I warned you about that guy.

When you show him where Jesus said believers are going to hell, he says that was before Jesus died so those believers were not justified.

When you show him that Abraham was justified thousands of years before Jesus died, he switches and says those working miracles in Jesus' name were not believers.

When you show him where the book of Hebrews, Romans, Corinthians show Christians can go to hell (after Jesus died), he says the books were written to Jews.

What amazes me is how BabaGnone pretends he doesn't see the dubious excuses just because they are defending the same position.

You're arguing with a man who believes there are two gospels and two Jesuses.

My advice is you ignore that one and discuss with the rest.

Arguing with him is like shouting back at an alarm system gone off.

You should either ignore it or put it off.

Tobechi20, what we should be working towards is good stable marriages.

It is God's plan for continuing the human race.

So it is beneficial to the society at large. It is good for the upbringing of good children. It is good for the wellbeing of the spouses too.

The approach you have taken is one aimed at watering down the inestimable importance of marriage.

That is the work of the devil. That's why he and his agents are trying to force the rest of us to accept gay unions as marriage, legalize and promote abortion, pornographyy, casual premarital sex etc. The devil knows that all these will weaken the institution of marriage. And when marriage is weakened, society will fall apart. Humanity will be destroyed.

Women were more loved and respected when society took marriage more importantly. Since society started promoting all those vices above, women have been terribly disrespected. Sometimes they're even treated like animals whose worth are only in servicing the pleasures of men.

If you doubt look at our music videos. You see women shaking their bum bums and guys pouring champagne all over them and slapping them.

I dont even want to talk about the humiliating dehumanization of women in pornography.

No woman or man was designed to raise children alone. 95% of those single mothers and divorcees will still be preyed upon and used as guinea pigs to satisfy the sexual urges of other people's husbands. Husbands who will fight tooth and nail to safeguard the unity of their own proper families.

Do you know that it is scientifically proven that a woman carries the DNA of any man she has unprotected sex with for the rest of her life?

Think about the mental and spiritual consequences of this.

*I strongly condemn violence and unjust manipulation from men and women alike.

What I advocate is good, loving, stable and holy marriages for men and women.

adsonstone:
I didn't claim that.
By the way, is that impossible?

If Sts Peter and Paul discouraged private interpretation of scipture for Christians with their words and actions, and you encourage it with your words and actions, because you claim to have the Holy Spirit, then you're claiming to know the Holy Spirit more than them.

It is impossible...given that you contradict the Holy Spirit. What is possible is that you have a contrary spirit.

adsonstone:
You said this


Were you referring to the NT when you mentioned "Scripture" there?


Anyway,
I'm talking about the same the scripture Peter mentioned in 2Peter 1:20-21, the ones Jesus referred to.

I'll mention the NT if/when I'm referring to it.

Yes. The NT is scripture. The Church leaders wrote it. The Church leaders canonized the complete canon of scriptures for Christians OT and NT. Only they have the authority to interpret them for Christians. "No private interpretation," says St. Peter.

adsonstone:
My problem with Fr Mbaka?

"...he cannot lead Nigeria. As things stand right now, from the oracle of the Holy Spirit, Jonathan should honourably resign quietly and let Nigeria be. The destiny of Nigeria is greater than Goodluck Jonathan."


Do you know the level of influence that statement about the incumbent President can have on his re-election/campaign/Votes received?

So? Is Fr Mbaka the only Nigerian influencing votes? There are hundreds of people doing so even on nairaland as we speak.

adsonstone:
Do you think he has not changed the orientation of several people by making such statement and even implying it is from the Holy Spirit despite saying he's not campaigning for anybody when he's definitely campaigning against a candidate?

Did the Holy Spirit tell you the message is not from him?
Does the Nigerian constitution forbid a Nigerian adult making a peaceful campaign against a candidate?

adsonstone:
Yes, Nigeria needs a change!
Is it impossible for Jonathan to be the one to bring the change/transformation Nigeria needs?

It is possible. It is also possible that Jonathan can never bring the change we need.

You still haven't said what your problem with Fr Mbaka is...or what he stole from you.

All you did up there is ask questions.

What is your problem with Fr Mbaka?

BabaGnoni:
https://i57.tinypic.com/34sp9j4.gif
Jokester... trust my guy, italo.
This 1-10 is a revised version after the first 1-3 botched attempt
Go over my post up there, your earlier 1-3 and the revised 1-10, was preemptively touched in it

Yes or no answers are not too difficult.


1. Were the people in Matt 7:22 justified?
2. Were members of the early Corinthian Church justified?
3. Did the members of the early Corinthian Church sin?
4. Was St. Paul justified when he wrote Romans 7?
5. Was St. Paul sinning when he wrote Romans 7?
6. Was Paul talking to justified believers in 1Cor6:8?
7. Were the people Paul was talking to in 1Cor6:8 doing wrong and sinning?
8. Do wrongdoers go to heaven?
9. In Rom11:20-23, was Paul talking to Roman justified believers?
10. Could these people be cut off from Christ?

vooks:
You, Shdemidemi SEPARATED.....

Is this what calvinists or baptists or whatever they call themselves resort to when cornered? Mutilating scriptures?

He has succeeded in ripping the Bible asunder just to defend heresy.

ayoku777:
Ofcourse, it is possible to give up on your faith in Christ Jesus.

Names can be blotted out of the book of life according to Jesus.

And that means someone who once had eternal life can lose it, if he loses his faith in Christ.

This is how to deny Christ

1John 2v22 -Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is the antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

To deny Jesus is to not believe He is the Messiah, the Son of the living God.

A believer cannot deny Jesus, otherwise he is no more a believer.

A believer who does not do the commands of Jesus has denied Christ.

You agree?

BabaGnoni:
Are you minding him...
He is learning selective forgetfulness and convenient ignorance just like frosbel does sometimes





Notice the red text from the above that he was answered

1. Were the people in Matt 7:22 justified?
2. Were members of the early Corinthian Church justified?
3. Did the members of the early Corinthian Church sin?
4. Was St. Paul justified when he wrote Romans 7?
5. Was St. Paul sinning when he wrote Romans 7?
6. Was Paul talking to justified believers in 1Cor6:8?
7. Were the people Paul was talking to in 1Cor6:8 doing wrong and sinning?
8. Do wrongdoers go to heaven?
9. In Rom11:20-23, was Paul talking to Roman justified believers?
10. Could these people be cut off from Christ?

ayoku777:
Obviously you've not understood my point or my stand.

I've been pretty explicit about my scriptural stand that A CHRISTIAN CAN LOSE HIS SALVATION but not until the point of unbelief (or disbelief) in Christ.

I don't believe a christian loses his salvation when he sins, no matter how many times and I've shown verses to buttress that.

But that if carnality degenerates to the point that He no more believes in Jesus as the Messiah; he is no more a believer. He has denied Christ and he loses his salvation.

That's my point.

Then these questions are for you.

6. Was Paul talking to justified believers in 1Cor6:8?
7. Were the people Paul was talking to in 1Cor6:8 doing wrong and sinning?
8. Do wrongdoers go to heaven?
9. In Rom11:20-23, was Paul talking to Roman justified believers?
10. Could these people be cut off from Christ by failing to be kind?

I see that people are dodging my questions, so I listed them here again.

Please BabaGnoni, shdemidemi, ayoku777, answer Yes or No. No long dubious epistles.

Vooks, alwaystrue, FortresOfChrist, please by my witnesses.
Tell us simply:

1. Were the people in Matt 7:22 justified?
2. Were members of the early Corinthian Church justified?
3. Did the members of the early Corinthian Church sin?
4. Was St. Paul justified when he wrote Romans 7?
5. Was St. Paul sinning when he wrote Romans 7?
6. Was Paul talking to justified believers in 1Cor6:8?
7. Were the people Paul was talking to in 1Cor6:8 doing wrong and sinning?
8. Do wrongdoers go to heaven?
9. In Rom11:20-23, was Paul talking to Roman justified believers?
10. Could these people be cut off from Christ?

BabaGnoni:
There you go again.
Why couldnt you leave out "biased" when mentioning the ID?

"...accused me of ad hominem and not arguing logically..."
- © italo

accused me of ad hominem and not arguing logically?
Regarding the "ad hominem", you were getting personal with shdemidemi instead of tackling his current post or submission
C'mom admit it, you strayed when you outlined some of his opposing viewpoints which werent within the scope of this thread raised by FortresOfChrist

Regarding the "not arguing logically", I posted you made a logical fallacy
because if according to you, one who preaches is a preacher, teaches is a teacher, sings is a singer, bakes is a baker
and then drum roll, your pièce de résistance, one who sins is a sinner
why then is not your child who does bad, not a baddie
This is where I said you made a logical fallacy (i.e. you made a mistake)

alas...the BabaGnoni has since disappeared into Afi River Forest
- © italo

BabaGnoni has since disappeared into Afi River Forest?
You got that wrong, as BabaGnoni, personally would have preferred disappearing to the top of Afi Mountain

You don't know the half of it. You sure made me laugh
italo, subtlety is the art of saying something and getting out of the way before it is understood

Ah...so you're alive. Now can you answer the queries I put to you?

And yes, I can call anyone who does bad a baddie...or anyone who steals a thief...or anyone who lies a liar...or anyone who pretends a pretender...or anyone who sins a sinner.

No fallacy there.

SalC:
See sweet mouth ok agreed...I was lovingly forgotten by my brethren

Btw Jnrbayano said he wants to be your John the baptist before becoming someone's Jesus.....please do something, though I think you don't owe him that.

I'm in the process.

SalC:
Isn't it bad enough that am the only regular here who don't ever get a mention when such multiple mentions take place? Smh
Why nah

Because you're not a mere member of the thread. You're the backbone...and we all love you dearly.

Forgive us.

vooks:

How do we have a debate with somebody who thinks Hebrews and Peter are not scriptures?

How do you reason with somebody who thinks a 'brother perishing' means him getting lost in Afi River Forest?

You are another shade of Frosbel with tons of garbage between you and the Truth

I wish I could help the guy above but how can you help a guy who says that Jesus' gospel is different from Paul's gospel...and that the Jesus on earth is different from the one in heaven now.

His problem is too deep

.

The above is the first thing I said about him when I got on this thread. Then one biased BabaGnoni accused me of ad hominem and not arguing logically. Then i decided to engage him in a reasonable discussion while quoting BabaGnoni all the time, alas...the BabaGnoni has since disappeared into Afi River Forest.

Hiswordxray:
I told you before you are too carnal. If you don't understand spiritual things just shut up and read.
And as you humble yourself I know you would get to a place where you could understand these things.

@BabaGnoni, I haven't seen you condemn this.

Is it ad hominem only when a Catholic does it?

vooks:
My broda,
When you look at that scripture italo has raised, Jesus speaking BEFORE his death and resurrection was talking future. How could the subjects of that passage invoke the name of Jesus to perform miracles? I thought the name of Jesus was invoked AFTER Pentecost.

Supposing hypothetically the name of Jesus was used BEFORE his ascension, How many disciples did Jesus make? At Pentecost, they were 120. He appeared to about 500 in 1 Cor 15. Let's assume that EVERYONE of these guys invoked the name before the price of Justification had been paid and they perished. Would they really count as MANY?

That passage needs some honest reflection and not brushing. Given these guys could use the name of Jesus EFFECTIVELY, they must have been believers. Otherwise you are left with an awkward situation where unbelievers invoke the name of the Lord they are not submitted to. We saw sons of Sceva attempting this and failing .

What italo the Catholic is raising is serious; under what circumstance can a believer lose his eternal life?
Hard core calvinists will tell you it is IMPOSSIBLE to lose it

Moderates like ayoku777 will tell you that you lose it once you denounce your faith. Theoretically, you can sin and kill everyone in the whole world and still get to heaven because your 'faith' was intact. You can worship devils and offer human sacrifices and still get to heaven because your faith is still there. I note he is careful to mark the point of no return as 'unbelief' something he can't bother define. What is UNBELIEF?

Another clever theory injected is the REWARDS theory. It states that the works and your conduct AFTER coming to Christ earns you a bigger reward in eternity not eternity itself. The lesser you do the lesser the reward/crown. Sin in other words robs you of your reward but not eternity. THis is a softer version of the Hard core calvinism since here you can't lose your eternity as well

There is a fine line between ASSURANCE of salvation and license to sin

Believers who don't find it remotely revolting for men to spend eternity in hell for rejecting Christ are extremely bothered by by the thought of a born again guy perishing in hell. What's the fear of perishing? DOn't you have the Word and the Holy Spirit in you? If that is not sufficient to save you, then nothing will

The Bible is awash with passages that prove that one can sin and go to hell after being justified. Here are just a few.

Rom. 11:20-23 – Paul teaches that the Jews (the natural branches) were broken off by lack of faith (v.20), but says that the Romans stand fast through faith (v. 21). So the Romans are justified. However, Paul then says that the Romans can also be cut off if they don’t persevere in faith and kindness (v. 22-23). Hence, those justified before God can fall away from the faith and lose their salvation (be “cut off”). Paul also says that those who are cut off can be grafted back in if they do not persist in their unbelief, for God has the power to graft them in again (v.23).

@shdemidemi, BabaGnoni, paxonel, fortresofchrist...Will justified people who are cut off from God make heaven?

1 Cor. 9:24-27 – Paul says that all the runners compete, but only one wins the prize. Paul recognizes that if he doesn’t train himself properly in perseverance, he too can become “disqualified.” The word "disqualified" comes from the Greek word "adokimos" which literally means cut off from Christ, or reprobate. When “adokimos” is used in the Scriptures, it always refers to those who are to be condemned by God. It has nothing to do with going to heaven with less rewards. See, for example, Rom. 1:28; Titus 1:16; 2 Tim. 3:8; Heb. 6:8; 2 Cor. 13:5-7. This proves that Saint Paul thought he could lose his salvation.

1Cor6:8 But you yourselves wrong and defraud—and believers at that. 9 Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God..

@shdemidemi, BabaGnoni...see again, believers committing sin and in danger of not going to heaven.

shdemidemi:
1. Were the people in the passage justified? Yes or no. No! No because the price for justification had not been paid at this time.

James 2:21 Was not our ancestor Abraham justified by works when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?

Abraham was justified thousands of years before Jesus came.

So your answer is false. Those people were justified, yet committed sin and went to hell.

BabaGnoni, vooks...what do you say to the above?

shdemidemi:
Did the early church in Corinth commit the act of sin? Yes or No

Did Paul call them Carnal? Yes or No

Did Paul call them saints because of their sanctification and justification by God through Christ? Yes or No

Yes to all the questions.

That makes me correct. The early Church believed and was justified, yet it sinned and was called carnal.

christemmbassey:
bros go back and study Rm7, its evident that you only read dat portion. Study, Study and study. BTW, happy new yr, bro.

Rom7:19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do.

St. Paul said he sinned.

What else is there to study?

@BabaGnoni, are you with us?

efficiencie:
So you are saying that a new convert undergoing the salvation of soul that dies in sin will go to Heaven! Hmmm...denominational doctrines!

The opposite of the bold is what I can deduce from his post.

efficiencie:
So you are saying that a new convert undergoing the salvation of soul that dies in sin will go to Heaven! Hmmm...denominational doctrines!

Please show us where he said that.