₦airaland Forum

[b][/b]Commencing with the Burgundian Crusades of 1017, the precursors of the more notorious crusades to the east, the Christians began to make significant inroads into the Iberian peninsula. The taking of Barbastro in 1064, in which thousands of Muslims were slaughtered immediately upon a long siege having been lifted after the two sides had signed a peace treaty, set off a grim pattern for the reconquest of Andalusia by the Christians:

@~Lady~: Read the above and know that it is long before 1095 or so that you listed for Crusade to Jerusalem. Look at it again. Burgundy is part of France today. From the text above, you will see that muslims in continental Europe was already feeling the heat from the Christians, before the Middle east Muslims began to feel the same.

I remember the first invasion of Iraq by Bush Senior. It was dubbed desert storm. Then the next invasion was desert Shield. I wonder what was the different between the two: same players and same theater. Can you see the difference? Hardly by any honest heart. Even George Bush Junior called his war Crusade. This is the more popular lingo for any war between the evil muslims and the good christians. The christian god is bigger than the Muslim God, declared a military general (Haden or hegean is his name), to applause of notable audiences in DC metropolitan area.

I guess I may not be a liar afterall. The point is that you had no intention of honest dialogue with me. If you did, you will realize that i never "interpreted" the verses of the Qur'an. It is for all to see as written. If God meant something else, he would not reveal what he revealed. It is convenient for you to interprete some part of the Bible, while you leave others exactly as it is written. That type of convenience will not work with me. Its all to be interpreted because the christian god did not mean what he commission people to write down. Hence the need to interprete everything.

And I do read. I can read the bible and my experience with those who say they are Christians is very extensive. I was nursed by a woman who is now a former christian. I have two sons from another, while my University life roommate is an active pastor in new York city. Just now, a pastor had just left my home in Manhattan. I wonder what i do not know about the Bible.

When the Quran challenges any issue, you complain. And before you had said jesus was the prophet to all nations. But just above, you just got an epiphany that it is Paul that was commisioned to to bring salvation to the gentiles. Well, say what you want, it will not change the truth. I may be a bad presenter of islam to you, for this I ask godto forgive me. One thing you can not deny is that you were not told. My duty is to keep you inform. The acceptance is really based on how your Lord sees your heart. But you have a choice to be humble or not to God.


And by the way we Ijebu people are very clean

@4Him:

Quote from: babs787 on Yesterday at 08:47:14 PM
I read your biblical verses up in relation to the use of the word' father' in which you ignorantly believed that God is your Father. Please can someone be a slave and at the same time be a son?


that al'lah regards you as no more than a slave does not mean the God of the bible does so too . . . read what He says about me . . .

Romans 8:16 The Spirit [of God] itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: 17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

Sorry bro, i'm not a slave please. Everything i can overlook but don't you EVER refer to me as a slave. I don't serve your task master.

Sorry David. Even in your Bible, in the matter where the alleged writer, Timothy is cautioning Masters and Slaves/servants about their duties to each other, he even called both parties, the slaves an the masters, servants or slave of Jesus! In that verse the Bible writer made it very clear that Jesus is also a servant of God. David. Omo mi (see I called you Omo mi, yet I am not the Baba. Baba na, Olorun a je ko pee fun e. Amin), don't let me fish out that Verse for you. You can do it. But what is the benefit anyway, if Timothy calls you Slave/Servant of Jesus and Jesus says that he is not God as in Mark 12 verse 29 and then you call God your Father, yet your Father is in Nigeria, but definitely not God?

Am sure you remember how Barack Obama was able divorce his Spiritual Mentor. So the Spiritual Mentor could have been the one who divorced him, if the table was turned around. I know that we are talking about human to human. But the case of you and God is even more critical. While you could not truly divorce yourself from the true position that God places you with Him, slave, whatever you say outside of this true position is your own desire and not a true statement in front of God. But God is the Only One nobody can question. Yet He is the Only One Who can and will question all.

Quote from: babs787 on Yesterday at 08:47:14 PM
God even asked you a question that, how could you be His Children when you have no edge than those not calling him by that and he still punish you like others and you should know that you should be different from people not calling him father because it means you must be his children and he shouldnt have left you to be suffering with others (Muslims, atheists etc).


Please go grab a dictionary and find out the meaning of these two words:
- deceit
- revisionism

those 2 absolutely encapsulates all that you represent.

Please grab the same dictionary and find out the meaning of Father and then son or daughter. You will see that God will not be described as the father and human, male or female will not be the son or daughter with Him.

Now here is a bit of scripture for the benefit of those who may fall victim to the sleight of hand of this slave who is merely going about his master's business -

Hebrews 12:7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?

Simple - God disciplines us AS SONS just the same way our earthly father would not hesitate to whip us when we are caught stealing N5. Would our father disown us because we told a lie and got flogged? Would he refuse to pay our school fees?
Same way . . . like your father, God disciplines His children because He loves them and wants them to learn from their mistakes.

That punishment is very different from that reserved for the unsaved (like blabs and olabowale), no matter how nice a man is . . . he will NEVER love someone who he never begat neither will he work to pay his school fees.
God's wrath is forever on the lost . . .

I grinned at your example above. Not because of my name being there, but because of your fable. Look here, what kind of a relationship do you truly have with the man that you call, father, when you stole N5 in private and you never honestly confess it to him and seek his forgiveness. But then he recorded all your moves and then, he took you out to the cross road, with rubber tire and a gallon of Kerosene in hand. Then he called people together to watch how he light your hide (hide and skin) on Fire and get burnt to smitherine. But wait, he then tells everyone else that he was not really your father that it is just your own desire that drives you to call him father, because he so much loves you and wanted the best for you. Well, hellfire is created for those who tell lies against God and other major sins, without changing their ways before they died.

Quote from: babs787 on Yesterday at 08:47:14 PM
The economic hardship shouldnt have been your portion, you ought to have been elevated and we His slaves shouldnt be having any say in anything but you dominating everything. Oro buruku


This same subtle form of deceit was what brought down eve in the garden of Eden . . . hath God said? You ate now, have you died?

Dear, apparently you NEVER read this - Matthew 5: 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Dont gloat in your own blindness just yet . . .

Read the bible, Herod was the Tetrarch . . . Lazarus was a mere beggar. We both know where they ended up.

You have failed to see that we continue to tell you that the writers wrote evils and you are following their evil writing. You will see that if you take everything at 100% from your book, you will have a time you call yourself child and then Slave/Servant. But David, in honesty, you did not interprete when it came to the verse where you can claim Father child relationship. You took it literally. But when it came to others that will go against that, and God Lord being One and that Jesus is a human servant/messenger/prophetof this Invisible God Lord, you find the convenience of Interpretation and not literal Biblical reading at that time. Who is Zooming who here? Honesty is a very difficult thing to have 100%. Try it regarding religion in belief in 1 whole God.

Quote from: babs787 on Yesterday at 08:47:14 PM
David, have you come across a verse in the bible that says you should not call anybody here on earth your FATHER but the only one in heaven? Please what do you call your mother's husband and did I hear you say Father?


Rubbish . . . Matthew 23: 9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

The key thing which is obviously missing from most muuslims is the ability to think and understand before running away with a poor mastery of the scriptures.

Is there a need for mastery in something so direct and plain as this?  It says don't call anybody on earth father. But the only one to call father is The One in heaven! That is simple enough. You have not follwoed the instruction and yet you want to apply mastery to something so simple. I think you begin to jive us, when you switch to this type of theateric called mastery of scriptures.

The disciples of Christ had fathers . . . none of them stopped refering to them as their father.

Father . . . in the sense of the above verse you quoted is describing a purely spiritual phenomenon.

Did I not say that you have such a big bag of tricks in your mastery. Now it is not father but Spiritual father? Is this the same relationship with Jesus being son? Omo Obanta. Big Ijebu man, you.

This rather than be a banana peel for the christian CLEARLY exposes your duplicitiousness. Earlier your argument had all along been that God does not want us to call Him father . . . all of a sudden . . . now you turn around and say we shld call only Him father and not our earthly fathers?

You miss his statement, David. He was reminding you that your Bible, if it was true and if you really take it to be true, then ypu should have not called anyone father, except the One in Heaven. I guess the Bible writers did not take their own instructions.

"None is more patient than Allah against the harmful and annoying words He hears (from the unbelievers among mankind). They ascribe children to Him, (They worship His created beings as Gods and saviours), yet He bestows upon them (sound) health and (worldly) provisions" (Bukhari)


None is more devious than al'lah.
Why is al'lah ANNOYED that you call him your father?
Why do the words "father" annoy and harm al'lah so so much?
Why does al'lah want NO children?

A.llah is not your father, thats why. Why should the One who is not subjected to death and He is always complete needs to have children?

Who is this al'lah? I certainly want NO part of him.

Arrogance of Numerod, Pharaoh, Qaruun, etc.  

Do you know how 2 certain nations called PAKISTAN and BANGLADESH were formed?

Your hypocrisy is apalling.

And when did Combined Pakistan broke away from Mother India? And when did Pakistan then broke up into these two nations? Are there still Mu.slims in India now? I remember the fool who was their president, the deginer of their Nuclear Bomb. I remember he is a M.uslim. Few Years ago a m.sulim yong reciter of AlQur'an came to New york to lead us in Ramadan prayer. Only for that and he went back after it. David you aint got no argument.

I read it and went through it with a fine toothed comb and here was my verdict - another poorly contrived piece of hypocritical turd.

Thank God you have your long life ahead of you.

@~Lady~: Rather, the period of Inquisition, is the last phase of Crusade in Continental Europe.

@~Lady~: I was talking about Crusade, you concentrated mainly on Crusade to Jerusalem. And you only gave the first one. But there were many more to Jerusalem itself. Further, there were other places than Jerusalem/"Holy land" that the christians launched their many crusades. And it did not affect the M.uslims alone.


2.1 First Crusade 1095-1099
2.1.1 Siege of Jerusalem
2.1.2 Crusade of 1101
2.2 Second Crusade 1147–1149
2.3 Third Crusade 1187–1192
2.4 Fourth Crusade 1202–1204
2.5 Albigensian Crusade
2.6 Children's Crusade
2.7 Fifth Crusade 1217–1221
2.8 Sixth Crusade 1228–1229
2.9 Seventh Crusade 1248–1254
2.10 Eighth Crusade 1270
2.11 Ninth Crusade 1271–1272
2.12 Northern Crusades (Baltic and Germany)
2.13 Other crusades


ANDALUSIA
Books and E-Books
On Muslim History and Civilization


At the end of the Eighth Century, the whole of Andalusia was the most populous, cultured and industrious land of all Europe, and remained so for centuries. Its trade with the outside world was unrivaled, and in this time of economic expansion, the Jews, who had been virtually eliminated from the peninsula in the seventh century by the Christians, grew once more in numbers and flourished. The following description of their position is to be found in Hume's ‘Spanish People’:


Side by side with the new rulers lived the Christians and Jews in peace. The latter rich with commerce and industry were content to let the memory of their oppression by the priest-ridden Goths sleep, now that the prime authors of it had disappeared. Learned in all the arts and sciences, cultured and tolerant, they were treated by the Moors with marked respect, and multiplied exceedingly all over Spain; and, like the Christian Spaniards under Moorish rule - who were called Mozarabes - had cause to thank their now masters for an era of prosperity such as they had never known before.
This tolerance of the Jews and Christians by the Muslims, characterized the early centuries of Islam in Spain. All the Jews and Christians who accepted the Muslims as the rulers of the country were allowed to retain their possessions and their beliefs and religious practices, and to continue their way of life within the framework of the society despite the fact that both these communities denied the continuance of the prophetic tradition beyond their respective prophets, Moses and Jesus, on whom be peace. The Muslims gave the Christians the freedom to make up their own minds. As long as the Muslims of Spain followed the guidance they had been given, they did not molest the Christians and, writes Gibbon:


In a time of tranquillity and justice, the Christians have never been compelled to renounce the Gospel or to embrace the Qur'an.
As in the time of the reign of Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths, in Italy, however, the Catholic Church was not content with this arrangement. Its members felt bound to impose the official religion on anyone who would not accept their point of view. In the guidance of Islam, there are provisions for the tolerance and acceptance of the Christians and the Jews, the 'people of the Book'. In the religion of the Official Church there was only intolerance and rejection of any religion other than the one it had formulated. By claiming that God had become man, and died for humanity so that everyone who believed this would go straight to 'heaven', it logically followed that there was no longer any need for a prophet on earth. A man could do what he pleased and still go to heaven provided that he bowed before the cross and said he believed in Christ. The appearance of another prophet after Jesus (pbuh), the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), was therefore very embarrassing for the Official Christians, especially when so many people accepted his guidance. In its attempts to fulfill its claims and aspirations, the Church was bound to try and subvert Islam, and to eradicate the Muslims, in the same way that it had eliminated the Unitarian followers of Jesus before them.

While the Muslims held to the guidance they had been given, they were protected. As with the Arian Goths, the Muslims became vulnerable to the activities of the Catholic Church, once they began to wander from the guidance they had been given; the dynamic process of flowering in which the community of Cordoba bloomed during the ninth and tenth centuries, inevitably meant that the original simplicity of its first Muslim inhabitants was lost. The richer it became the further it departed from the blue-print of the first community in Madina al-Munawwara, which had been richest when its members were most poor. The Prophet said that he did not fear poverty for his community but riches. He also said that every nation has its trial, and that the trial of the Muslims would be wealth.



Those who fought to maintain or restore the practice of Islam in all its aspects thus found themselves fighting not only the Christians, but also the so-called Muslims. It was a hopeless struggle. They found themselves in a process of collapse and decay which could not be reversed. As long as the Muslims of Andalusia had remained united in their practice of Islam, they had continued to expand. As soon as they divided, their numbers began to diminish, and the Christians were able to commence the business of taking over the country. Furthermore, because of the unfortunate split between the East and the West within the Ummah of Islam, no help from the Muslims in the East was forthcoming. This disunity was one of the fundamental factors which contributed towards the eventual elimination of Islam from Spain, for it was a weakness of which the Christians took full advantage.
Once the Muslims in Andalus had divided, the armies of the Church gained a foothold in the country and, aided by the Christians living within the Muslim domains, who had grown in numbers and flourished under the tolerant Muslim rule, their hold over the country continued to grow. As in the case of Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths, the atrocities committed by the advancing Christian armies moved the Muslims to take revenge on the Christians within their kingdoms. This only weakened their position in the land, and increased the determination of the Christians to conquer them. Retaliation brought about retaliation. Intolerance bred intolerance. Revenge stimulated revenge,

Commencing with the Burgundian Crusades of 1017, the precursors of the more notorious crusades to the east, the Christians began to make significant inroads into the Iberian peninsula. The taking of Barbastro in 1064, in which thousands of Muslims were slaughtered immediately upon a long siege having been lifted after the two sides had signed a peace treaty, set off a grim pattern for the reconquest of Andalusia by the Christians:


It was an invariable custom with the Christians, whenever they took a town by force of arms, to ravish the daughters in the presence of their fathers, and the women before the eyes of their husbands and families. But on the taking of Barbastro the excesses of this kind committed by thorn pass all belief; the Muslims had never before experienced anything like it. In short, such were the crimes and excesses committed by the Christians on this occasion that there is no pen eloquent enough to describe them.


All.ah: All.ah is the proper name in Arabic for The One and Only God, The Creator and Sustainer of the universe. It is used by the Arab Christians and Jews for the God (Eloh-im in Hebrew; 'Alla.ha' in Aramaic, the mother tongue of Jesus, pbuh). The word All.ah does not have a plural or gender. Al.lah does not have any associate or partner, and He does not beget nor was He begotten. SWT is an abbreviation of Arabic words that mean 'Glory Be To Him.'
s or pbuh: Peace Be Upon Him. This expression is used for all Prophets of Allah.

Biography • Science • Civilization • History • Andalusia • Americas • Qur'an • Mu.hammad • Companions • Oil • Other • Audio • Books

~Lady~, do your own research. There were crusades before launching crusade to Jerusalem. You will see there were many crusades against Musl.ims, before the one that you listed as your first in your response to me.



E-Books on Islam and Muslims

Copyright © 1996, 1997 Dr. A. Zahoor
All Rights Reserved
Excerpts from Ahmad Thomson's book on the subject of Islam in Spain, 1989.
"Islam in Andalus," Revised Edition by A. Thomson and M. Ata'ur-Rahim, Ta-Ha Publishers, London, 1996.

http://www.cyberistan.org/islamic/andalusia.html

Recommend This Site To:
Name:
Email:
Your Name:

@Pastor:

When the Imam came he explained, not from the Koran but from someone who he called the eminent commentator on koran and hadith.  I can't recall the name, it was a long arabic name.  He said that Nafs is what drives the body, I asked,"do you mean the characteristics?" he inclined his head left and right in a comme ci comme ca way and said sort off.  He then said Ruuh was the fuel of the body.  Like a machine.  You have a car, the body, the driver is the Nafs and the fuel inside is the Ruuh.  I suggested Ruuh was breath and he responded that what did I mean by breath.  I said breath.  He said well people understand different things and have different connotations from breath so he needed to know what I meant.  In other words that was left unanswered.  Anyway he said that the engine can't run without fuel and so it is with the body without ruuh.

Not everything about Islam is in the AlQur'an, in full details. The explainer of this Noble Book, is the Prophet (AS). God sent the Book and sent the explainer with it. He was waiting already as a matured man for it. No one explains the AlQur'an unless their own fountain of explanation is the prophet, the source among mankind. And when you said to the Imam, nafs as the characteristics, a single word. He did not want to give you a yes, because it is more than characteristics, alone. And what you meant, anyhow by characteristics is only your own knowledge. He would give you a ton of information about nafs, if it was time permissible for both of you. But you could have said of Ruuh as breath or Spirit of life. He would have said yes, rather than when you said breath alone. And I will shock you here and now; when God said He breath His Spirit to Adam, it should not be considered as when a person breath into a person to ressucitate him. God is Holier than that. he has power of command. He says that he comands Adam to Be, so Adam was!

The reason that I even responded to this thread is when the people began to say that human is made of three elements; each separate. And in honesty, they did not say each is coequal. But they brought the three as separate making up the human a a means of fostering their agenda. It is then that I thought it is best that i let them know, by Allah's permission that Ruuh and Nafs are the same. And truly man is a mixture of its seen (physical form;body) and the Unseen (the unformed or without shape form; Nafs/Ruuh).

Another very interesting thing he said was that when the embryo is formed in the womb, after 4months God then sends the Ruuh into the body and that is when the foetus becomes a living soul.  4 months!, I thought, but I did not say anything.

Am sure you are familar with the term first trimester in pregnancy? 4 months is after that, whereby any one who performs an abortion of that feotus, the right to lifers always say that its like killing the person. Moreover its very complicated at this time than if the abortion is done much earlier, in the pregnancy. Disclaimer: I am not advocating any one performing abortion. I am just expalining the feotal condition, with before and when/after the Ruuh is brought into the womb.

To conclude he advised me that there are more central things to Isla.m than Nafs and Ruuh and told me about the 5 pillars.  He said that the important thing was to be aware that God is One and to worship this One God.  Nafs and Ruuh though important are incidental to the main point.

His advice is very sound. What is the benefit of all of the knowledge, if you reject the central theme that the whole knowledge is much much secondary to? Your superior knowledge can not mean anything in the day of Judgement, if the belief in One god is not sound and correct. Yet the least knowledgeable and weak person who belief in One god in a very sound and correct way, will receive mercy of god and be entered into His Garden.

I find that hard to accept because I cannot think of anything more important than understanding oneself and the motivations that drive one, especially if they are capable of driving you either to paradise or hell.

But if you have all the knowledge and do not fear the punishment of God which He will carry out by the fire of hell, and at the same time long and hope for His mercy and forgiveness by which He will show by ransoming one with a place in paradise, then will lack of understanding oneself and the motivations that drives one be an excuse with with God, if one is thrown in Fire and will it be also a reason to say one deserve the rewards in paradise if one ends up in it? Neither position can be attached to what you need to know first before Understanding God and the your obligations to Him. God says that He did not creat us except to worship Him. This is the purpose of life. It is the Core single purpose. The verse following this statement from God, is followed by His saying that all sustenance he has provided and it is up to him alone.

An unattractive personality does not translate to an 'unattractive body' in that sense because the attractiveness of the body is just a matter of taste. But whatever occurs in the anima will have a correspondence in the body, human aesthetic judgements like pretty or ugly are not the issue. Contained in the Anima is the entire process from birth to old age. Growing old is not a process divorced from the Anima. Growth and decay are expressions of Anima.

Am sure that you have heard that Prophet Joseph was very pretty. His physical beauty was what attracted the wife of his master to want to have sex with him. It was his pure Ruuh/Nafs that stopped him from going for it.

I pray that what we say to each other will benefit us. I pray that God forgives us our misdeeds and bad speech. I pray that God softens our hearts to receive guidance from Him. I pray that He has mercy on us and forgives us our sins.

@Pastor AIO:

Sir, I do not quite understand your fear of people claiming trinity, but this argument has nothing to do with Trinity and I wasn't going to go there so let us proceed in truth and integrity and not twist arguments for fear of what conclusion it might lead to.  This is a very important point because it is the cause of so many errors.  One cannot follow an argument with integrity when he already has the conclusion in his mind.  He will try to bend the argument in order to make it get to the conclusion.  The proper way to proceed is to just follow the argument to wherever it leads.

My esteemed brother, I like your style. I have no fear of anyone, but God Almighty, alone. I pray it remains that way. And I was not going to talk about trinity, since I aluded to discouraging the would be proponent not to even try to use my argument, which I left somewhat inconclusive, to be used to proof it. And we need to bare in mind that it is not in all cases that a conclusion is already formed that integrity is thrown away, in order to argue for what is obvious. If a point is clear, and it is stated as such, whereby it becomes the focus of debates, one needs to be sincere in speech for the discussion to be a good debate. One is important in argument is truth about a subject. One should present the truth, sincerely and with honesty as much as one knows it. But the truth is the truth. Absolute truth is absolute. there is no other way to express it.

|This reminds me of the argument of an old medieval christian Theologian.  He was trying to demonstrate the mercy of God and how well God thinks of us.  He say for example that wherever Human beings have raised towns and set up habitation that God is so merciful that he sends them a source of fresh water in the form of a river or a lake.  How ridiculous!  Is it not in fact the case that wherever there is a source of fresh water that human beings will go and settle there.  The water is there before the humans not vice versa.  But that is what happens when you have a conclusion even before you started pursuing an argument.

But this argument about water and human settlement will actually be not always the norm. For right here in the USA, we have a city call Las Vegas, without any water source at all. Yet, in the middle of the desert, is where this city of several millions is situated. All the water that they use in this city, is not from a source that was indigenous to it. Well, you dont want meto tell you about many more cities that are in desert now? But in all your argument, you started with Flesh and Spirit, but I did not see where you spoke about Flesh and Nafs, just as boldly. What you have done was exactly what i said before; Spirit and amina/Naf are the same. You can not really have one without the other. It is the Spirit/Soul that its dominating in the Spiritual way, whreby it is the extension part of it, Nafs that is the anima of man.

@Pastor AIO:

Even in the Atheist the Ruuh is active, otherwise how could they still be alive.  It is only that it is still in foetal form.  However it is possible that with the minimal influence of Ruuh(just enough to keep him alive) a man can still go around walking and talking and seeming intelligent when in fact he is no more than an AI.  While this is not quite separation of the Ruuh from the body, still you see that the Ruuh's influence is very minimal.

But the food of the Ruuh is good healthy Spirituality. Atheists claim that they have spirituality, except that they do not believe that something is the Creator and OverLord/God over them. he Nafs is the active part of the thing that I call Ruuh/Nafs combination in a man that is alive, barring his religiousity, or expression of Spirituality. A religious person is often termed a spiritual person. You will also know that a person may be bubbly in personality, expressing some enviable anima, but without any religiousity, yet he may be referred as a lively person. Hence, you will see that Ruuh and Nafs are two different sides of the same Coin. You can not have have one without the other. Both have to be present for the body to b alive, just both sides of the coin have to be present, for it to be a means of change for goods and services.

Yet when you minimalise the influence of the Nafs you get immobility.  A sleeping man or a man experiencing an OBE (out of body experience) is still alive but his Anima is withdrawn from the physical world and the use of his physical senses.  Someone can even become clinically dead by the reduction of Nafs influence.  So you see the three (Ruuh, Nafs and body which is a projection of nafs) are inseparably linked to the life of the individual.

But a sleeping man tosses and turns. Breaths and even the eye moves rapidly, in REM state. He remain active as adequately as his sleeping condition calls for. Some people talk in their sleep. Some even scream because of bad dream. We have heard of people who slap or strick the person sleeping next to them. Some people sleep walk. Some will even drive to the store and come back, all though in a sleeping state. What I have have tried to do is to make you or anybody admit that nobody will be alive if truly the Ruuh is removed. But you have also proven that the Ruuh is also Nafs, in an earlier presentation. Atleast here you have indicated that they will be inseparable from each other in a combination with the physical body when a man is still living. But you have not proven that they are two different things, like water and soil. Although we see them to be the admixture needed to make the physical body of man. but regardless they were separate before they were combined. This is what you can not proof in man. We see where you and me agree that Spirit was breath or blown into man/mud for it to be alive. How did Nafs comes to the body, except that it is an accompanying component in the Spirit, when it is blown into the body?

@Pastor AIO:

You asked the question which part must be removed for the organism to be dead. The life of the organism comes from the interaction of these three parts. You can not remove any part from the other and still have a living person. If the Anima ceases to project into materiality then the body will decay and die. Also the Spirit gives life to the whole. Ultimately in this world all things are One, but experienced as a myriad diversities. I see Nafs as having a closer connection to flesh than to Spirit.

It seems to me that you are saying neither is more important than the other in the keeping of the Physical body in a stage that one say that he is still a living being. Calling him by his name instead of being called just a body. You do know that when a person dies, they just call him body but not his name? I am saying on the other hand that Nafs, is the same as Ruuh. When Ruuh enters the body, it becomes Nafs, because until that time there was no Nafs. And I also say to you that when a person is dying and death is occuring, the Nafs is returning back to being Ruuh. Death or withdrawal of the Soul/Spirit, whereby the body becomes lifeless, starts from the toes/feet of the dying man, going up until the death is complete. The body gets cold, and it is the feet that gets cold first, because the soul/spirit/life is leaving the body. Spirit/Ruuh is the Spiritual as in religiousity part of the person. The reason is that it has in the time of it being removed from the body of Father Adam, since this is the true father we can claim, while God is our Creator and Adam's Creator, the Spirit of man had confessed or declared in an oath that it is God that its Lord. Hence, the spirit of those who have warped belief about God the Lord whom it had in the beginning confessed or declared His Lord are demostrating bad spirituality.

Let me make it alot simple about soul/spirit: God says that we are created from dirt. Since Adam is Our father, we must have come from the same materials that he came from. Adam had all the elements that we have, but he is not dirt, in the physical similarity because the dirt became flesh, blood, bone, etc as the Spirit was blown/breath into him. Same is Nafs and Ruuh. (When we die, don't we go back to being dirt?). And we also know that a person can be brain dead, without any personality anymore, the anima. He may be kept alive by the aid of machine, keeping his blood still circulating in his body, with oxygen to keep the organs/cells alive. But when death is to occur, the brain wave will register a bit of activity and then flattens out as the death is complete.

@PastorAIO:

Flesh and Spirit! Let me explain it.

My question was about 3 elements: Body/Flesh, Nafs and Ruuh. If body/flesh is to be alive, between Ruuh and Nafs, which one must be kept house in the body, if it is possible to lose the other one, or render it unimportant. Or for a body/flesh to die off and be ready for burial or cremation as is done by Hindus, or for it to be rendered no longer with us, which of the two, between Nafs and Ruuh that needs to go? You are treating Spirit/Ruuh alone with the Body. I hope you will treat Nafs with the Body somewhere along the line.

By Flesh I do not just mean the material physical mass. Flesh includes the anima.

There is no way you can argue that Flesh is not the physical mass that is part of the total boy, consisting of Flesh, Bone and Blood for the most part. I am not detailing the skin, hairs and nail, because you do know they part of the body. And your anima issue reminded me of Shakespear's The Marchant of Venice, two popular sentences: The fisrt was made when the Marchant was detailing his gluttonic demands, if the debtor did not pay him back on time. Shylock was his name. He was going to carve out a pound of flesh from the body of the Creditor. But the defense, did not object, except that it only have to be just that without any drop of blood. Except that they knew that Shylock was going to be brutal in his action, by his wanting a piece of flesh from a debtor, that they were certain that his action will be fatal to the life of the debtor. You see amina and flesh are not the same thing. The emotional quality or personality of the person may be what the anima may be part of.

In fact the physical body is no more than a projection of the anima. Like when you put a film into a projector and you get an image on the screen. Whatever happens to the film in the projector will be projected onto the screen. The projection and the film are one yet they are in different positions. The film is in the projector and the image is on the screen.

Except that Physical body is always there, from birth. In fact it is the physical body that starts first, exactly at the point of where and when the sperm and egg becomes that element that develops to a human baby. The anima, as you say, personality develops later. But a film spool in a projector that is not turned on will not be a projection of the film on the screen. You have to turn the projector on with the film on it and with proper screen to make the projection visible for the eye to see it. The film can not be seen with regular sight without it being projected as a projection on the screen. It is when you make the film active for normal eye to see it, that we see what the film houses.

What ever happens to the anima will be reflected on the body. When stirred the body will stir, when dulled the body will be dull, when the anima desires to go forth and follows the impulse, the body will go forth. The anima is what animates and projects the form of the body. Nothing happens to the body that does not first happen to the anima. And some have argued that everything ascribed to the anima can be explained by looking at the body's neurology.

But it is the anima that is the inner person. The one that is the personality of the person. The body houses it. It is the physical that let us know, as the symptom of the anima that is inside, which can not be seen with the naked eye. A person who gets old, though the body is breaking apart, rather shows sign of age, will still have the same personality/anima. But if his anima is unattractive as obnoxious, rude, etc, though he may projects it it still will not make him bodily unacttractive or rude to the sight, if he is a handsome person, physically.

@A_K_O: The Signature, "You Dig?" Is that it? Okay. I got it now. I wonder how the people of Prophet Noah (as), felt about their hard position against him, when the Vessel was close shot and they were not in it. And water was coming from every where at then, in which at sometime they drwoned in it?

My brother, have a soft heart. Don't be arrogant like the Pharaoh who perished in the Sea. I wish you well.

@~Lady~:

But I know it

I actually own a Bible translated directly from the original. Yup there have been many translations of the Bible, but it still remains the general consensus of it that Jesus is Lord.

Just simply saying you have your copy translated "DIRECTLY" from the "ORIGINAL," is unbelieably stretching the truth, considering the year the Original may have been written, if there is any. Well, you have to show us what you have and the Original that it is translated directly from. We need to compare them, because I can not just take your word for it this time. I will be true to the statement of Ronald reagan this time around, about Goberchev: Trust, but verify.

Translated in French, SPanish, German, English, Latin, Portugese, Chinese, Japanese, and much more, it is still the same message. Red is rouge is rojo is rot is ruber is erythros, it is still the colour red.

And you know that when you say something is red, you will be reqired to show it, since the person who is not color blind knows that what you have is not even any shade of red, but lime green.

It still has the general consensus. That is why it is important to have guidance, from the Spirit when you meditate on the word in private and from the ordained Priest when you are gathered in Bible study or the regular reading of the liturgy at mass or Sunday service.

Except there is something called reality. If it is simple, clear and direct, is there a need for further explanation? If I say I am a male, is there any need for an explanation that can make me the person with woman internal pipings between me and my wife? Again, if I say am in New York City, this moment, is that not direct enough, that there is no need for any wiseguy to explain/interprete that am actually in Los Angeles?

I love for you to explain Mark 12 Verse 29 to me where Jesus himself said that he has a God Who is his Lord, different and separate from himself. This said Lord God explained by Jesus, is One and not divisible. Compare that with your saying above where you said Jesus is still lord. Will there not be a party that is not knowledgeable or and not telling the truth, as the two are directly no agreeing with each other?

Quote
Better yet, its like accepting Chinua Achebe's novel as if its 100% the account of some person's life., or a religious book.

Um not true. Chinua Achebe's book is not a translation of a previous book. It is the original copy of it's own story. Use a different analogy.

Read my premises about Achebe's book: it is not 100% the account of somebody's life and its not a religious book. If you miss my point, which does not need interpretation, but yet interpreted it to mean that it is not translation from a previous book, then you see how easily interpretation distorts reality.

Quote
My point is, in arrogance we could really do harm to ourselves. A person who gets punished by God in the day of judgement because of not turning to the right path, while he was warned while he was on earth, deserves all the punishment he/she will receive.


Yet there are different translations of the Qu'ran, I know I've read them don't make me post them for you, so then would you conclude that the translated Qu'ran has the same "lost message" effect?
If so, then there are a lot of confused muuslims out there.

If you read Chapter Yusuf, in the AlQur'an, the second verse says that AlQur'an (mentioned by name) is in Arabiyya (a language which it is read in, in all i.slamic functions). (Please note that in the Bible, the name of your book, Bible and the original lanuage which it was revealed or inspired to the prophets; Moses, David and Jesus, are not mentioned). Now you can see the difference in your argument and the reality of the situation?

Quote
And in any case do you expect me to drop my bible and become a mus.lim? You've got to be kidding me!!![/


I like this, permission to use it PLEASE!!!

hahahaha

If I say to you that telling lies against God and also against Jesus, and others is terrible than stealing or illicit sex, etc, will you at least consider it in your heart, than just to to follow blindly, adopting a mob mentality to that decision, because somebody said, "You must be kidding me, if I want him to stop the lies!" This is exactly what has happened in your so very happy and even borrowing the "You've got to be kidding me!!!!" quote.

Pay attention that neither you nor A_K_O have approached the challenge of Jagoon as it concerns the discrepancies in the Bible. A_K_O had asked that I look at his signature. I will take a look. But I wonder if that signature will be a means of blessing or otherwise for him, in front of his Creator, in the day of Judgement?

@4Him: David what Babs787 said, in his last entry above, is very heavy. Please read it, be patient in digesting it and please take a long while before you respond to it and never forget his advise. I wish you well.

@~Lady~

I believe this was after the muuslims had brutally invaded and killed many Christians and Jews and the Christians started fighting back. Maybe this continued because of that. Ofcourse you will forget that piece of history.

Unfortunately, if you know the history of Mus.lims in Spain; Andallusia, Cordova, etc as its seat for Continental Europe, you wll not "boldly" wrote, as to remind me of Is.lamic history. The piece of History that did not happen, is what you just said I forgot. The truth is after inquisition, in Spain, it is then you have Crusade. Just imagine if the Mu.slims were killing non muslims at that time, would anyone who was not a Muslim exited? The Muslims ruled Spain for close to 8 Centuries! Where are you getting your informations?

Do I condone the killings, absolutely not, but it still remains that from onset the spread of Christianity wasn't by force. The spread of Is'lam from onset was by force.

If the spread of Is.lam was by force, why would they ruled a place for about 8 centuries and did not make every one a mus.lim, or ride off the face of the earth whoever did not compile? You will see that you can have it both ways. Islam ruled India almost about 8 centuries, as well, and yet they still remain a significantly small population. How is that the product of "Become musl.im or you die?"

Finally, when it came to middle east proper, we see that when the M.uslims became the ruling group, which will be different and opposing your "there was none," quote about Musl.ims, they left the people alone to practice their chosen religion. This is the reason that you have non musli.ms still, in Arabia today. When Jerusalem was conquered, the Mus.lim leader, Umar was offered to make salah in the church. He refused it, because he did not want to set presidence about it concerning the church in Jerusalem.

And finally I wonder why Mus.lims, even today are hoping that many more become Mus.lims, how was it enough in the earlier times, you suggested, that mus.lims all of a sudden not forcing anyone, anymore? Would it have been that they did not force people ever before, but the anti islami.c surrogates could not but device a lie, against it? I wonder how the protocol will change now, if I.slam was to remain pure to its trueness, all the time?

@4Him:

Quote from: olabowale on Today at 06:45:10 AM
At-Tabari recounts that in the year 16 A.H.

why is this so great a "miracle" not recorded in the quuran? Could it be because it is nothing but a mere legend dressed up as miracles?
Where is this "miracle" recorded elsewhere in history if indeed it happened?

Since you did not even accept something this simple and not that its so unique, anyway (remember that the Bible claimed that he had walked on water? The only people who saw him were his companions. Even those companions could not even walk on water!), how then do you expect us, rational minds, the same rational mind you just applied by which you made the subtle opinion of the musl.ims records being a matter of mere legend, but which is dressed up in miracle, to now accept the Trinity as a possible reality? Remember that you had said that it is not recorded in AlQur'an, so it may not happen, but you dont even believe anything from the AlQur'an anyway. Now watch this, Trinity does not appear anywhere in the Bible. If its not there it aint there. Then tell me where Trinity is recorded anywhere in history. I guess those who may postulate any idea that resemble multple godheads are the obvious pagans, who you do not want to deal with.

But of course, borrowing the undevined ideas is another thing entirely.

As for your dancing around God being a Father issue, i merely provided just one of the numerous verses about God being OUR FATHER. . . here are a lot more . . .

Matthew 18:14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

So the one who has the absolute "will," is not Jesus, based on this verse? And that is the One who is in heaven, while jesus is on earth, and probably the speaker. You will see that since you are trying to merge two separate entities together, in other part of the bible, even though they are even in different planes, here above Verse, you will see that it will meaning to it, the ease of which the word "father," is used.

Mark 11:25 And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.

Again, Jesus on earth, as shown in the above verse, is not the one who can forgive you your trespasses. Afterall, didn't Jesus himself make the same prayer, along with his companions?

Luke 6:36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

Another sign that Jesus is not the one that holds Altimate mercy.

Colossians 1:2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Further evidence that God is different from Jesus.

1 Thessalonians 3:11 Now God himself and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you.
2 Thessalonians 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

Apart from the obvious, I clearly see that the statements above, and many others are showing us the writers are expressing their own opinions and they are not God's nor even Jesus' sayings. This above will also kill the concept that there is no word of others but God alone, in the Bible.

@Mazaje: Its nice to make a statement. At best you are only suggesting, but your accusation has no proof. Who can not do that? But support your argument if you can. Am sure that you can not know about Arabic more than Arabs. So your whole statement, because there is no valid proof, is Zero!

@Bideen: Salaamualaykum, wa Rahmatullahi Taala wa Barakatuh. Thanks for the invitation. May God accept the good intention, for you. Amin.

@Huxley:

BTW, what is your definition of TRUTH and how does it relate to human life? How does one go about uncovering such truths?

Posted by: huxley
Insert Quote
What TRUTHS do the religions possess?

The Truth is what purpose of life is. When you know what is the purpose of your life, then True religion, will help you achieve it. However get going with the quest of finding the purpose of your life, first. After that, you will be able to know that there must be a path (the exact religion) that is designed and available today, to help you achieve it.

@~Lady~:

Not physical fire silly. Baptising with fire is receiving the Spirit, like when the "tongues as fire" rested upon them. Basically you have received the Holy Spirit.

Please, read the verse from the Bible about Baptism, again. I will post two of them below so that you do not have to worry to much. Now tell me how you can, in good conscience say what you said about either of the two verses, as i have quoted you above?

If you are sincere, forgeting that the verse isvery straight forward about spirit and fire regarding the baptism, I will allow you to interprete as you did, the interpretation is what is quoted; Now tell us how you can not see that therewill be two spirits coming to play in the baptism? the one that is in the baptism and the one you manufactured to be received in your quoted interpretation.

If you look at the sentence structure, the verses in the Bible or your own quote, you will see that you must be consistent, with how the spirit and fire come together, since they are both active in the baptism. there is no way you can ignore one, and leave it intact in the original premise and began to interprete the other part. It does not wrk like that. I wonder if the Mountain of Fire (receiving spirit, if I use your idea) also baptize with spirit, since they have a mountain of it already. It should not be hard for them to just pick and choose.

Posted by: ~Lady~
Insert Quote
Quote
Luke.3:16…John said…, "I baptize you with water; but he who is mightier than I is coming, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

Matthew 3:11…. "I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

First of all, I thought the gospels were conflicting, how then do they match?


Quote
this is the better who among you like to baptize with fire, any want of you like to grill

Not physical fire silly. Baptising with fire is receiving the Spirit, like when the "tongues as fire" rested upon them. Basically you have received the Holy Spirit.

Posted on: Yesterday at 08:49:21 PMPosted by: ~Lady~

Please explain how baptizm with fire becomes receiving the Spirit, while Baptizm with Holy spirit, did not become something else. Both coming from the same sentence and they both are the active ingredients of Baptizm. How can one change and the other does not change? Is the word fire, um? But there is a church will exactly that "Mountain of Fire." Maybe there are others. I don't know. You are in a better situation to know than me.

@4Him: Aburo, ma da mi laa muu.O ki nshe obinrin kee. Obinrin ni o ma nfe daa okunrin laa mu. (AS Baba. Baba kee; thats some old stuff). About the history of the sahaba. It was to open Persia. I have many things I could tell you, from I.slam that will blow your mind. But what will be the benefit to you. When your heart is soft enough, and it has received Is.lam, I will still be alive, inshaAllah. We really can talk about this.
quote
Salman reported that the Prophet said: "Nothing but supplication averts the decree, and nothing but righteousness increases life," and "Your Lord is munificent and generous, and is ashamed to turn away empty the hands of a servant when he raises them to him." Tirmidhi transmitted them.

At-Tabari recounts that in the year 16 A.H. the Muslim army turned to the Persian front. In order to confront the Persian king at one point the Muslim army found itself on the opposite bank of the great Tigris River. The commander of the army, Sa`d Ibn Abi Waqqas, following a dream, ordered the entire army to plunge into the rushing river. Many people were afraid and hung back. Sa`d, with Salman by his side, prayed first: "May Allah grant us victory and defeat His enemy." Then Salman prayed: "Islam generates good fortune. By Allah, crossing rivers has become as easy for the Muslims as crossing deserts. By Him in whose hand lies Salman's soul, may the soldiers emerge from the water in the same numbers in which they entered it." Sa`d and Salman then plunged into the Tigris. It is reported that the river was covered with horses and men. The horses swam and when they tired the river floor seemed to rise up and support them until they regained their breath. To some it seemed that the horses rode effortlessly on the waves. They emerged on the other bank, as Salman had prayed, having lost nothing from their equipment but one tin cup, and no one having drowned.

They went on to take the Persian capital. Salman acted as spokesman and said to the conquered Persians: "I have the same origin as you. I shall be compassionate toward you. You have three options. You may embrace Islam, then you will be our brethren and you will have the same privileges and obligations as we. Or you may pay the Jizyah tax and we will govern you fairly. Or we will declare war on you." The Persians, having witnessed the miraculous crossing of the Muslim army, accepted the second alternative.
Unquote.

David, I know you will abandone this topic, and now move to another mundane one. You see what arrogance does. Instead of facing the truth, you will quickly jump to another issue.

@Pastor:

Yes, but there are certain things I'm still compelled to ask. If the Ruuh is equal to Nafs, and the Ruuh that inspired The Great Prophet is Gabriel then that means The Great Prophet was the incarnation of Angel Gabriel?

Angel Gabreil did not inspire the prophet, as you normally say in the Bible. Gabreil delivered Messages, Instructions, Commandments, all from God to Mu.hammad. Gibreil does not go about of its own accord. no sir. And M.uhammad was not an incarnation of Gabreil. Muha.mmad was from the nation of man, created from the body of Adam. The Angel, Gibreil being from them is created from Light. See dirt which man was created from is different from light which Angel is created from. There is no way you could talk about incarnation here. Their natures, hence their spirits are different.

If Nafs can err from truth that would mean that Ruuh errs from truth?

Ruuh/spirit already acknowledged the Lordship of God. Hence, people know in their core when they deny the truth about God and His commandments. Hence a person who is doing evil knows that somehow, there is impurity of action being taken by him. The Ruuh pure condition is masked and suppressed by the personal choice.

When we jihad against nafs are we fighting ruuh too?

We are unmasking the Fitra (what the soul/spirit is about; purity), while we are trying to dump the things that are evil, personal choice, which were deviations from what the Ruuh has declared in its pure state in heaven.

If Nafs is the product of Ruuh and jism then how can nafs be judged in the final when Jism no longer exists?

First God will recreate us in whole, for Judgement. Please check it out in the AlQur'an. People in paradise will recognise one another. The people in Hellfire will also recognise one another. If this is the case, then know that humans will be raised up intact.

When I point out Christ's distinction between flesh and spirit the Flesh in this case is not dead matter but it has it's tendencies, it is animated. It has an Anima or Nafs. It's tendencies veer away from the truth of spirit but we need to bring it back and realign it to the spirit. Until they are thus aligned I cannot accept that they are the same thing. An errant Nafs cannot be the same as Ruuh, because Ruuh cannot be anything but blessed. Besides While the Nafs is still in operation the Ruuh can be awakened (born again) so we have these two tendencies operating in us at the same time. The Blessed and the accursed. They are experienced as two separate things within one individual, how can they be the same thing?

Yet from "What do you think about this Bible Verse," thread, its seemed to me that you did not only state that Spirit exist in man, but Soul and Spirit are the same thing. I asked a question the other time about soul and spirit. I may just ask you about it here and now; Please tell me which one of the two that will be removed or missing in man, that will make the man not alive, but death, between Soul and Spirit? Just one, Ruuh or Nafs? You will see that the two are the same of different form. But please note that these are created things, because somebody may want to use it to argue trinity. It will not work.

You disagreement is of your own nafs, truly disagreeing with your Ruuh, which has been made dormant to truth. But truth still remains to be discovered by you, which will make your Soul active to it.

@4Him:

4 Him (m)
USA
Posts: 1831

Offline

Re: The Gospel Of Barnabas(the True Forgotten Gospel)
« #357 on: June 13, 2008, 11:59 PM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
M.uhammad's followers by faith walked on water while every one of them was riding on their horses.

1. What is the definition of this bogus "faith" in the quuran?
2. Where is it recorded that any muuslim walked on water? Are you begining to invent tales again?
3. If they were walking on water, where were the others riding their horses? On water too?

David. Aburo. When I said the companions walked on water, above, please read it correctly. They did it all of them riding their horses. This means there weight and that of their horses were on the surfaces of the water. There was no one on foot. Get it, brother man? Make yourown research on Google. Its the story of the Companions. Check it out. I am very sure of what am talking about.

Quote
This is a big deal for you?

unsubstantiated LIES is a big deal for me.

And you are still a christian? Is there any greater lie than saying that God is One of Three? Think about it, my dear brother.

Quote
The followers entered a jungle and they yelled to the animals: Oh you animals, we are followers of M.uhammad, the Prophet of God, we need this land (Jungle), we now ask you to vacate this jungle for our use, you and your offsprings! The sahabahs saw the lions and all the wild animals with their family leaving out the jungle as they were commanded

Are there Lions in the arabian desert? Lions can only be found in the jungles of Africa and India . . . did the prophet's followers see spiritual lions?

I think you did not remember the lion that Samson killed. In the middle east. My bro. Chill out. I can tell you more than you know from the Bible.

@~Lady~:

Quote
@Cayon: This goes to the heart of the matter. Who call Jesus, lord, lord, but Christians? Even Jesus is condemning a portion of this very religion. Please, fear the fire of hell. Jesus has already made his position known. Take heed, people!

Your interpretation of that verse is FALSE!!!!!
This is why I won't take you seriously on the interpretation of the Bible. You cannot apply your muuslim interpretation on the Biblical interpretation (as in if "this" is false then "that" must be true) I hope you understand.

There is no need for interpretation for what is very clear and direct. Olabowale my name, among the yoruba is not a name that needs any explanation or a further strange and indirect look at it. I use my name as an example of what is direct. Thats how i see what Jesus was reported to have said. Please tell me, from that verse, will any Christian go hellfire? Rather will all Christian go to Paradise? Remember that Jesus was not talking about M.uslims.

Quote
My darling Cayon, you told me by your very first post to begin this thread. Please read it, above. Rather you presented a verse from the Bible that says that Jesus said that not all persons who called him, lord. lord will enter the kingdom of heave. I guess it is clear that he, Jesus is talking about the Christians here. That some of the Christians will not enter Paradise.

What Jesus is saying is that just because someone walks up and says I am a Christian, does not mean that the person is actually a Christian.
Olabowale, I have told you many times, that there are those that claim to be Christian, but are false, that is why you see false prophets. Just because someone says that he loves God does not mean that he actually loves God.

Please note those that you call false Christians and false prophets are within the ranks of Christendom. This still proves what we are saying, about Jesus condemning some christians. Afterall, the fake christians and prophets are not Mus.lims, but Christians!

Don't come up with oh well this man says he's a Christian therefore he must be telling the truth. A lot of people claim to be graduates but indeed are not, this is a fact, we see it in Nigeria.

Oh yes perfect example "419" just because a man says he's abank manager does not mean that he's a bank manager does it? Evidence has to be provided (fruit) this goes in saying with the verse that "by their friut you shall know them.'
To know a true Christian? Well let them produce evidence. Just because they say oh Jesus is Lord does not mean that they truly believe that Jesus is Lord, not truly believing that Jesus is Lord grants no entrance to the Kingdom of heaven.

I hope that is a better explanation of it for you.

Not. I at least can read what is acclaimed for Jesus in the bible. It is direct and I may not like it or I may love it. I just dont see why i need any interpretation for something so direct.

If you truly want to know the "true" interpretations on the Bible, ask, rather than reading something and screaming "wolf"

This is what I tell you about understanding the Bible. You want to understand the Bible, go to those who study it well and they will give you the real answers, not what your Imam told you and asked you to pass down to the little ones. Because of your lack of understanding of a book you call false, I won't convert to Is'lam.

There is no need for an interpretation for a sentence so direct and so clear. What is there to understand about something as clear as a bell? I do not need imam to explain many parts of the AlQur;an to me. For example, when God said that he is One, there is no need for expalantion for what that means. When god says make prayer, there is no need for me to ask what is prayer. When God says that He created Heavens and earth and things seen and unseen, I ned no explanation or in the biblical term, interpretation. These things are direct. I can think. I do not need to be lied to.

@~Lady~:

~Lady~ (f) Re: What Do You Think About This Bible Verse?
« #10 on: Yesterday at 08:49:21 PM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
The Lord God Jesus was saying those people that Claim they gave their TITHES, TIME AND SERVICE TO CHURCH WITHOUT HOLINESS WILL GO TO HELL.

Chei backslider, correct.


Posted on: June 14, 2008, 02:58 AMPosted by: Cayon
Insert Quote
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven

Please tell me how what Backslider said, posted far above, that you respond to is a correct and direct explanation of what Cayon, said, posted near above? And how did I not get it, when I said that Jesus, based on what the bible said condemned some people in the Christendom, already, you seem to assume that I was not telling the truth. We see Backslider agreeing with me. This verse does not need any interpretation. It is so direct, that it reminded me my Primary one english about complete sentence: John comes to school, was the sentence, There is no need for explanation in this case.

Why does every verse in the Bible needs explanation? Is there any verse in the Bible that does not need any interpretation?

If you don't or there are, how do you interprete Mark 12 verse 29, talking about Jesus saying that oh my people listen, your God and my God, is but just One Lord! It denies anything more than 1 entity. Then we move to post Jesus verses where the postulation of of other people's 3 godhead was presented. If these two verses are interpreted, there is no way that they will mean the same thing. Please lets have a good conscience about this.

@Pastor AIO: I lifted part of your writing from the thread "What do you think about this Bible Verse," to illustrate our mustual dialogue about "Spirit," of man.

It is stated explicitly that there are two aspects to the human being. The Flesh and the Spirit. In most of us the spirit is lying dormant. Our bodies have been born and have even matured to adulthood but yet our spirit is still in foetus stage. It must come into realisation. it must be born. Just like the body has organs of perception so does the spirit. It is with the spirit that we SEE the kingdom of God. The sensual faculties cannot see this. What are the qualities of
Spirit? Spontaneity is one

I am sure that you know that Spirit is in man/as Ruuh or Soul (naf, when a man is alive)!

@May Kelly: My Father, died long time ago. God still lives. I don't see how they are the same. How can you be a true child of some entity, unless there is a conjugation between your mum and He? If this is not happen, in your case, and for sure it did not. Then you are either just saying what is not correct or he who claims to be your father is fooling you.

Or both of you are fooling each other. For sure you can not be right, for father and child always have blood relationship and ascentral lineage. In the case that you are claiming that you have this father, who is your grandfather, then? Who is the wife of this father, and who is his mother? Is this father the only child or do you have Uncles and Aunts through the bloodline?

@A_K_O: If I tell you in Nigeria that the house is on fire and that you should wake up to escape with your life, before the house explodes and you are gone with it. Will you belief me and wait until you are being consumed by the blaze and then said; Oh, This Olabowale was telling the truth, all along? If you do that then you are truly deserving whatever comes to you.

I remembered a friend in College days who was cooking but dozed of because he was tired. What he was cooking got burnt. But that was not half of it, the apartment was filled up in smoke. He easily could have died in his sleep (believe it or not, he was studying Chemical Engineering: Peleo Tunde K). But some other student (Dilip sadsai, from India) came knocking hard on the door. You see if Tunde heard the knock and just said go away, today he would be no more.

My point is, in arrogance we could really do harm to ourselves. A person who gets punished by God in the day of judgement because of not turning to the right path, while he was warned while he was on earth, deserves all the punishment he/she will receive.

If you dont have original to cross check the veracity of what you think the copy is, then you might just have accepted the "Drummer Boy," by Sy Nkuweisi as a true account of a life of a person and not fiction. Better yet, its like accepting Chinua Achebe's novel as if its 100% the account of some person's life., or a religious book.

We would not deviate from cronological posting of Verses of the AlQur'an here. The next post from the AlQur'an should be from the beginning of Surah baqarah.

@Samba123, give us your thoughts and what you know about Surah Fatiha.

@A K O: Thats why, my brother you should be careful about something you do not know its origin. What if the Origin or Original is different from others?
As a Nigerian, you know that you can not tell an Igbo joke in Yoruba language to an Hausa, and thing it will mean the same as when it is told in Igbo to an Ibo? If you want to tell Hausa a joke, tell hause joke in Hausa language.
But when you tell hausa an Ibo story, in forced Yoruba, and he ask you for the story record as it is written originally in Igbo. If you can not produce it, I am certain that the hausa man will think that you are playing him, about the story. That you made it all up, or part of it or take some of it out. For whatever reason.

This is human nature. God would not ask us to believe something that we can not simply reason out. He will not give us rationality with irrational thoughts.

God is direct in truth. He will not give us clumsy things to think about and also as a source of our information.

@Jagoon: Get the original in emitic Language. Then thats how you can begin to tell.

@PastorAIO: You should just have gone to talk to knowledgeable Imams. You will just have to find out by yourself. There are so many information that we have in Is.lam. Sometimes it may be difficult to pinpoint the source, without a more detailed research, as a muslim. Thats why you see people studying I.slam, more frequently. Checking and rechecking, again.

The Noble Qur'an The Holy Bible
Man, mud and spirit Man, soil and breath
Behold! thy Lord said to the angels: "I am about to create man, from sounding clay from mud moulded into shape;

"When I have fashioned him (in due proportion) and breathed into him of My spirit, , 15: 28-29
God shaped man from the soil of the ground and blew the breath of life into his nostrils, and man became a living being.
Genesis 2.7
Translations used:
Yusufali Translation used:
New Jerusalem Bible

Relate in the Book (the Qur'an) (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East. Y 19:16
And had chosen seclusion from them. Then We sent unto her Our Spirit and it assumed for her the likeness of a perfect man. P.19:17

In order to know man Islam takes three distinct levels into consideration;

Jism (body, physique),
Nafs (personality, character), and
Rooh (soul, spirit).

Namely, in one of the philosophical outlooks of Islam, man is composed of three parts; Jism, the physique which is of material substance and we deal with it in physiology and biology. Thus our bodies are known to various systems and as far as these scientific areas are concerned Islam has no disagreement with anyone.

Nafs: Nafs in man is the totality of sentiments, tendencies, desires, wishes, experiences, and our heredity characteristics; in short, it is man's personality.

What creates a difference between one man and another is Nafs rather than Rooh. It is man's Rooh which transform and evolves.

Rooh: Based upon the Qur'anic verse; "They ask thee concerning the spirit (of inspiration). Say The spirit cometh by command of my Lord: of Knowledge it is only a little that is communicated to you, (O men!)." (Holy Qur'an 17:85) This verse teaches us that the spirit is an 'Amr' i.e. the work of Allah. In other words, it is a created thing, not self-existent. The Holy Qur'an does not go beyond telling us that. It does not tell us the nature of the spirit. However, just like our ignorance of the nature of electricity or magnetism does not prevent us from taking full advantage of these wonders of creation, we can advance ourselves spiritually by taking full advantage of the functions of the spirit.

Rooh is something which descends to man from God and we interpret it as our 'inside Prophet' namely, it is a representative from the Lord inside Insan. And this what is interpreted as 'Gabriel' in the case of the Prophet as was the Holy Spirit in Jesus (pbuh). It is the relationship of God with man that appears under various names in different Prophets. This spirit is clean and innocent and it cannot err. Rooh never appears in plural form in the Holy Qur'an (although common men have pluralized it; 'Arwah') since it is a single reality. So there is no difference between your soul and my soul, the two of them 'is' a reality like the sun which radiates its, light upon all men. While the plural of Nafs is Anfos (or Nafus). And when and entire group of people get killed we say; "Their Nafus died rather than their Arwah," since the latter, being God's manifestation, cannot be killed. Where man develops the capability, aptitude, and the worth to discover Rooh, he will be aided by the latter. And when a disease attacks and the body and Nafs loose their natural balance Rooh falls into disuse and cannot establish relationship with man.

What distinguishes one man from another is Nafs which contains our personalities. And in our opinion the part of us which is responsible in front of the Lord in the final day is the Nafs of each of us. And it is Nafs which errs not the Rooh. The body is not that important since it is in constant process of change and transformation. However, what we believe to be the essence of man was placed in the Nafs, and it is Nafs which will be interrogated in the last day.

*** And please believe me, I do not bash Christianity. I was married to a Christian woman. My mother was a Christian, before she converted. I hope to develop a brotherly relationship with you. in due course, we may even call each other on phone. Who knows the future.
I will still get you references. Please do not hesitate to approach people of knowledge in isla.m and verify what I write.

@Pastor AIO: I just saw the bold letters, also starting with A. I guess that I must have thought you to be a good man to have dialogue with. Please excuse me. The entrant who I was trying to address is A K O.

@A K O: Check out my post above.