₦airaland Forum

@Syrup:

From what you stated, it is rather quizzical that Abu Kassim fits the essential descriptors of a devoted mu.slim before his conversion. He serious religious life before his conversion attests to that. To have shlepped him off as one who was not devoted on the basis of his conversion will mean that your indicators would require revision.

You know who Abu kassim (as) is? That is the nick name (Kunya) of the noble Prophet.

@Syrup:

Just curious: WHO is a "devouted Mus'lim?"

Abu Kassim (AS) stated that the best of generation was his, then the next generation and followed by the third. At least to begin to to understand Isla, m is not to apostate it.

The prophet also stated that belief goes up and goes down. When one is experience a down ward spiral in belief, the devoted should not apostate the deen (way) at that time. rather he or she should understand that the protection of God should be seeked in a more intensed manner. This is part of the sign of being a devoted person in the deen of God!

@Olaadegbu;

“I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; From the time that it was, there am I; and now the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me.” Isaiah 45:18

The speaker in this verse is obviously God, and yet He says He has been sent both by The Lord God (that is, the Father) and by His Spirit (that is, the Holy Spirit).

This is our Lord Jesus Christ speaking in the Old Testament before His incarnation through the prophetic utterance of Isaiah.

How is Jesus both God, the Speaker according to you above, yet a separate God and the spirit of God sent him, all in one shot? Does this make any human sense to you since this is material for human consumption? This is another reason that trinity falls in its face! There is no way that God will talk to human beings in a way that will be mysterious that the ordinary hearts that is good can not understand it. God will never talk in mystery, which will allow the deviant to have a cause to plead against a possible punishment.

God says in the Q.ur'an that He took an oath from man, declaring that god is his Lord to worship. So God says that i took this oath so that you will not be able to deny that you aforetime did not accept my Lordship over you. It is therefore very easy to see in the Qu.r'an the power of God in His Oneness.

How can you Olaadegbu argue that a spirit that is separate from God is also God, except that is an Angel. And angel does not have the same authority as God, anyway. And why would the "Spirit of God" be separate and different from God anyhow? What am saying is this if you take the spirit of God, it will be God and not out as a separate God entity. Any spirit that is separate from God in the sense that you Christians understand it, that spirit is not God, but Angel, because it is Godly. And anyway, Angels were there as creation long time before Adam was created. Even jinn was there before Adam was created. And Adam was the first man, long before Jesus!

The Old Testament speaks of our Lord Jesus Christ not just literally but also in symbols, shadows, prophecy, poetry, history, foreshadowing, spiritually, anagogically, allegorically, prototypically and in every way that the scriptures can be properly understood.

We read the scriptures with Jesus, in Jesus, through Jesus and by Jesus Christ. I will start from the beginning, in Genesis.

Reading your above statement, one will almost believe that everything written in the OT (Again, I take the position the truth has been mared with others, and no one is even sure of exact "Truth", was talking about Jesus and nothing else. And you know that is completely false. Finally, if you read the scripture with Jesus, etc as stated above, I wonder how many versions, editions, revisions, Jesus is reading with the christians? All of the Bibles that were ever printed? What happens to future editions, versions, revisions? All of a sudden they will also be read by Jesus with the Christians reading them? My man, please this is something you should take into consideration. I know you love Jesus, but overblowing it is not good, either.

Gen.1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Compare that with John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
verses 2-3,14 goes on to tell us who that Word is, Who created the universe and the earth. Eph.3:9; Col.1:15-18; Heb.1:1-2

Revelation knowledge show this Word to be Jesus Christ the Creator of heaven and earth.

Where will this exageration stop? Read this things above yourself. Please take yourself out of Biblical mindset. Substitute something else for the essence of the sentences. You will begin to ask yourself it each make any human sense. Please remember that this is a human issue. It must be dealt with from human perspective, only.

Another instance was in the trinitarian conversation in Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;, "

You live in England. Please listen to Royal speech. If the Queen can use Plural for herself, I wonder why you are constriction God who created the Queen from her father and mother from being able to use that Royal plural for Himself?

The word God there in Hebrew was in a singular plural (Elohim) or uni-plural noun. Plural pronouns are used of God, proving pluraity of persons ie Gen.1:16; 3:22; 11:7; 19:24; Isaiah 6:8; 44:6,8; 45:5,21; 46:9; Hos.13:4; Jn.14:23; 17:11,22-23;

"Let us make man in our image" This conversation comprised of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. So Jesus Christ the second Person in the Godhead before His incarnation was, is and is to come. Rev.22:13

How do you justify this absurd statement of Uni plural noun all of a sudden being a proof for plurality of person, whereby you could leap to that Trinity you are dishonestly presenting? You are a Yoruba man from your name. haven't you spoken to any Kingly person from Yorubaland? If I were home now, i will take you to Oba Sikiru Adetona, the Awujale of ijebu Ode. Or to King Olugbenga Sonuga of Remo. Or to the Ojomo of Owo. Each one of them will refer to himself alone in a uni plural noun, in public. Will this mean that they are also more than one or a trinity? Please my man, stop this thing that you just can't seem to explain rationally.

@Ndipe:

7I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
10Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

I could have responded to all the verses, but I kinda want you to take a serious look at begotten, which is the process of being used as the declaration of sonship here. Please give me the proper description of "begotten?" How do you beget a son, except through sexual intercourse? If this is not the action of God with Mary to produce Jesus, then that statement from the Bible is wrong. Is it not true that God is capable at all time to will a creation to existence, in any which way He desires? Is Jesus not a creation from God?

When I read verses 8 and the others after it, I do see a sign of agression, rather than the meek projections that the christians claim for their god Jesus.

@Ndipe:

Proverbs 30: 4

Who has gone up to heaven and come down?
Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands?
Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and the name of his son?
Tell me if you know!


Psalm 2 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

Who is being described here, Ndipe? Afterall Jesus did not have any children or did he have a son? If you say that God is being described here, then you need to ask yourself when did God go up in heaven and when did He come down to earth after it?

The only one who had gone to heaven and came back in a part of a single Night was also a father. He was known as Abu Kassim (as). Do you know who this man was?

@Syrup: I can summarize your misgivings by simply stating that you have not paid attention to the fact that Mu.h.amma.d was a prophet, like Noah, Ibrahiim, Moses and Jesus (AS), just naming a very few known to both of us. If you do understand that then you will see that his lord God Almighty was the One who revealed everything to him. Thats the difference with John or Mark or Luke or Matthew (all first name authors) said that Jesus said. Please learn it and understand it, since Jesus did not say that there will not be another Prophet (Comforter) after him.

But haven't your own conjectures been settled in another thread? I can't remember where I once read it when the debate was sizzling, but I remember than pilgrim.1 soundly settled your conjectures about who the Comforter might be -the Holy Spirit. Why is it so attractive for you to keep repeating a question you have failed to address?

So that yopu know, if Pilgrim1 settled it as you boldly stated, I will not be naive enough to refuse to acknowledge a briliant response. My wanting to know the name of his holy spirit/ghost god will tell you that no one provided one to me. I need a proper name. You provided father as God, even though it is not Proper name, i simply accept because i believe in One God. You used Jesus as a son god, I disagree about a son of God. But from your christian mindset, you provided an identity anyway. Now do the same for a ghostly part of your 3 headed god!

Since you challenged me for my own God, let me provide you with a direct insight of what God is. There is one Sigle God. He has a propher name. I call Him Al  lah. He has Angels and the ArchAngel is Angel Jibril. He is also described as holy spirit, since all Angel are in spiritual relm; Ruuh Qudus! Gabreil is also called by othe name s now. You can googlethis with a search title; Names of Angel gabreil from Is.l.amic point of view. Use whatever process, but in the long run, you will see that I am correct, God willing.

Jesus is a prophet, a human being, a son of Mary the virgin girl, a Massiah to the Children of Israel, a warner of his time with revelations and he proclaimed one God and the coming of the prophet called Ahmad, another name for Muh.amm.ad.

Meanwhile, asking for the name of the angel is like asking you to name every single angel mentioned in the Qur''an and Hadiths - have you been able to attempt that at all? And the names of the 124,000 prophets? Why do you try to point at others on issues you cannot resolve when presented to you?

If all of the 124,000 names of past prophets and messengers were important to my being a m.us.lim, all would have been provided to me. the most essential names are available in the Qu.r'an. This is enough for me. Further none of them declared any different message. They all have the central message that God is One and Only he should be worshipped.

Just curious at this repetitive attraction of yours.

My sis, don't be too curious because it will not benefit you until you know that god is a single Lord. He is not a three entity and there is no partnership with Him.

[Quote]
Again, this logic is flawed. I'm not Yoruba and hardly understand the language (wish I did, still learning though). But I wonder how an Arabic prophet would have tried to tell us anything about matters which were basically Hebraic, Greek and Aramaic? If the language proves a feat to you, there is no confidence in the case of the Arabic issue.[/quote]Except that Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic are all sematic languages. They are very similar. Let me show you. Cleaningness as in shower is called Tahara, in both Arabic and hebrew. Greek is not a family of any of these languages. More importantly, it has been reported that many people of foreign tongues came to visit the prophet (as), in Madina, there was not a report of translator between them when they speak their languages to him. Al.l.ah his Lord will make his earling take it and let his lips be able to speak these starnge tongues. A case in point is when the Christian asked him in Madina to tell them the nature of his God. Immediately, Chapter 112 of the Qu.r.'an was revealed to set God Almighty apart from His Creations. Now i ask you ead the Chapter 112 of the Qu.r'an.

[Quote]
I am still waiting to see where you find His statement in everything that He taught.[/quote]If there is no direct statement to him that are irrefutable, to anything that you said he taught, then how can you even believe it? Where is the Gospel that he preached all over the places? To preach whatever he preached, he must have been given a manuscript for that preaching! Not a manuscript that was written after he has taught and even was raised up.

[Quote]
In that case, you have simply told us not to trust the relationship that Muh.hammad claimed to have offered about his knowledge of Jesus. Muh.hammad was not even a secondhand relative in the Gospel events - he was so far removed from the place, time, culture, events and revelations of Jesus in a personal way that we could apply your own rule and objections have and outrightly reject any account Muh.hammad might have given - even though he claimed they were from "God".[/quote]If you get this from my statement, you have just interpreted me. And your interpretation is completely false, as usual. Again, you should not forget that the prophet of Arabia is a prophet/messenger of God. His teacher was God Himself. His tutorial ntity was Angel Gabreil. I guess he was in Makka, then a Night in Jerusalem and them the end of his life in Madina. All of these prophetic life in Middle east. Where is Galilee, Nazareth and Jerusalem again? Definitely not Europe, but Middle east. And he also shared ascenstral bloodline with them all the way to Ibrahim and beyond. And as we know the arabs and the jews even today call each other cousins.

That comes across to me as describing what we find in the case of the Qur''an and Hadiths. So many things there have been hung on Jesus - how would you know which was which?

REad your Bible and ask yourself, which is correct when you have two opposing verses on a single subject. Then come to the Q. ur.r'an for the truth.

[Quote]
Which strengthens what was stated above.[/quote]Only if we have heard it directly from Jesus and other prophets before him. Please stop justifying something you have no 100% assurance on. Just because a large number of people accept something it does not mean it is right. All of them are wrong if the premise they agreed upon is wrong.

[Quote]
Even more so for the many versions and translations of the Qur''an.[/quote]Versions? That does not happen in Qur'a.n. Styly of writing yes. And translation is what the translator thinks the verse meant. I can read Q.ur'an in hafs, a style of recitation and writing and then read it in Walsh, a different style. Both in the same Salah. You can not do that with the Bible; reading RSV in Greek and Douwy in Arabic in a Russian Church. Can you?

[Quote]
I wonder where you would stand if on the one hand you claim to beleiev in ALL the prophets and yet have no clue what they have stated and then begin to make excuses for SOME![/quote]You are just grabbling for straws. You continue to use Some and all to prove a point with me. For the last time, I believe every prophet of God and what they truly said. However I do not take for a fact what another person says which is ascribed to any prophet. So finally, you should rest your heart that what Paul and company said about Jesus can not be accepted by me as coming from one of my masters: Jesus. All prophets are my masters. And God is Master of all.

@Sheniqua: I often wondered if it is true that that is Osisi. But your abrasive nature of mummity sifted through. And you did not reply to my email. This is how the christians make friends? lol.

@Olaadegbu:Its unfortunate that you will believe that jesus was the speaker in the verse you quoted. You must therefore consder that he had instructed his own disciples not to preach to anyone outside the Children of israel. While he himself made it clear that hw was not sent except only to the house of israel.

The last i check, the Yorubas or others tribes of the world are not from the house of Israel. House of Israel simply means the progenies of Jacob who was named Israel! If you can not understand this above, then there is absolutely a big problem with you. And I did not have to read the Bible to know the statement of Jesus here above. It is im the Q.u.r'an in essence.

If your Bible contain verses that absolutely disagree with each other, then both of them can not be absolutely correct at the same time. At best you have 100% false and 100% right verses.

@Olaadegbu:

The book of Revelation was transmitted from God the Father to Christ the Son, to the angel, to John, to the churches, to us (believers in Christ) Rev.1:1,11

Unfortunately, Olaadegbu, when it came to the Angel, within the chain, you did not mention the name of the angel! i guess the link kinda broke right there. Unfortunately still, Jesus did not mention a further transmission or revelation to come to you after his earthly existence. Did he? Please show me that very part of your Bible. What he said was not more than a future comforter to come after his departure. If there was supposed to be anything coming from him, he had the chance to state it, but he did not. You are therefore making conjectures.

Rev.1:8,17-18; 22:13; 2:8 The Alpha and Omega are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet. This is used of Jesus Christ in Revelation except in 21:6

Olaadegbu, will it make any sense that you a Yoruba man be lectured by a Yoruba man about the history of the Yorubas in a Yoruba town, by your lecturer breaking into Celt; a language spoken by Danish people? Thats the example that you provide with Greek alphabets to explain things that happened in Middle east!

The identity of the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ is revealed in Rev.1:17-18 He said:

And you fell for such explanation which Jesus did not make of himself while alive? Who best knew the personage of Jesus among those who thought they follow him? No one could. We can not take the description of Jesus by Jesus as a secondary description of himself in relationship to someone elses.

"I am the first and the last:" "I am He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore. Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death."

Very easy to bear falsifiction statements and hang them on a person who we know can not refute it.
In Revelation 22:13 Jesus Christ is again speaking here saying:

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last"

You will find the same in most of the reliable versions such as the followings:
Today's New International version
New International version-UK;
Wycliffe New Testament;
New International Reader's Version;
Holman Christian Standard Bible;
New life Version;
Darby Translation;
Young's Literal Translation;
American Standard Version;
New Century Version;
New King James Version;
Contemporary English Version;
English Standard Version;
New Living Translation;
Amplified Bible;
New American Standard Bible;
New International Version etc

Some of the most reliable, you said. It gives the impression that some are less reliable and even some should have not been printed altogether. Its very easy to make uncorroborated statement, against a soul that is not available to challenge it. This is the case with you and your many versions of the Bible. And when you are challenged that you claim Jesus is God, most of you will say that he is son. Yet there above you call him the first (God, uncreated who creates everything else) and the last (God who will exist and continues to even after death itself dies). Where do you really stand, if you can not see that your position is completely wrong.

@Syrup: I wish you and your a restful memorial day. Enjoy yourself. But in the maintime, please use your own yardstick of Council of Nisea being an after the development of the Trinity docrine to debase it, for your New Testatment and Old tastament, therefore.

We see that the OT mainly Moses revealed Book completely disagree that God Almighty could ever be more than One singly Lord! He Moses did not hear more than One Voice at the Burning Bush. All the Time he had an audience with his Lord, there is always One God speaking. There was never a time that there was a sense of the Singly God convering with anyone and there was never a desention or interjection from any one; seen or unseen.

It will be very safe to say that Jesus and Holy Ghost were none persona grata in their relationship to The Almighty God. It is the after the raising up of Jesus to heaven that someone or group of people developed the concept of Trinity among themself. This brings about the point of lying or bearing false witness to the forefront again. Someone lied against Jesus, the Holy ghost and God Almighty. Someone bore false witness against Jesus, th Holy Ghost and God Almighty.

Just because something was written or said before a new idea came about to refute it, does not necessarily mean that it is right. The old idea that is.

@Stephanay:

my fiance and i are committed xtians. recently he got a leading from God to withdraw for three days. he will be on a fast fro these days and will be in a hotel all by himself. no cell phones, no friends, just him and God, sorta like ascetism

but i m not too comfy wt this because im worried that sthg bad will happen to him and he wont be within reach. also i don't know hw im going to cope without talking to him, am i just being emotional or is there really cause for alarm?

If a person is wise enough to withdraw from all activities, especially the bad ones by secluding hims/herself in a known place, that a person should be commended. In the case of this "fiance" of yours, he is in a hotel, a location you seem to know. Unless you doubt his sexual honesty because you and him might not have restricted your need for each other before marriage, then your concern is fully grounded.

What you need therefore is to marry him, as soon as possible. By your marriage to him, he will have the expectation that you may visit him, so that you are certain that he is okay, in future "three days" of seclusions. You may also have in your home a room, if not a wing dedicated for his "3 days" of future seclusions.

The Yoruba proverb applies to both of you here: There is a 1000 and 1 brides for a future bridegroom. Only his marriage to anyone or ones of them make that a person or persons his bride(s). You are not his bride yet, so become his bride, or tell him your concern or get a life of your own in addition to getting a man who is ready to buy the cow instead of milking it free of charge.

@Davidylan:

all these proves is that you must not have paid a shred of attention to the bible while growing up.

Thank God, because my head would have been clogged with so much confusion. On one hand he is just a man, and then on the other hand he is god, son of  and or partner of. What a confusion. You see why I am grateful to God?

[Quote]
Barnabas (whom you decietfully claim as your prophet) was born in Cyprus and understood the greek language. Dr. Luke (who wrote the gospel of Luke) was greek, Timothy (a faithful follower of Paul) was greek.

Aramaic, like Greek, was not a jewish language. If you don't care about greek then neither shld you care for aramaic.[/quote]Please show me a place that I said Barnabas was a prophet? Or anywhere I said that between Jesus and Mu.hammad, there ever existed any prophet.

At least Aramaic is a sematic language. Greek is not! I wo ogbe ni yi, gbe aago e. I am calling you in 5 minutes.


[Quote]
Would an igbo man have to learn arabic to read the qu'ran?[/quote]Would an Igbo man have to learn Oyinbo to speak English? Has any Igbo man learnt English? Has there ever been an Ibgo man who learnt Arabic and have the mastery of the language? All of these have a yes as complete answer to each. Now whats your gripe? Abeg go lern arabic, jo!

@Huxley: Ol boy, leave Syrup alone. She will never provide any direct answer. She will rather prefer the ritual dance of ducking the core issue. I am sure she sincerely believes that she is direct to the point.

@Syrup:

Let us be clear. HOW would you know that Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah and others did NOT state that God was known as FATHER? Did you ever read their scriptures and prophecies? Your answer would be "NO" - and if you never read them apart from the Qur''an, how would you KNOW what they taught and waht they did not teach?

I must have declared may times on this board that i went to a christian shool. Raised by a mother who was a Chritian. Roomed with a christian Reverend in school. Married a Christian woman. With all of these, do you think I would not at a time had a chance to actually studied the bible? Remember WASC? I took Bible Knowledge!

I am not here to badger anyone, just asking questions.

Again, I hear you. By the way, it was a figure of speech.

[Quote]
Do you believe in ALL what Isaiah SAID? Do you believe in ALL what Daniel, Ezekiel, malachi and Zachariah said? How would you know what to believe when you have NEVER once read their prophecies before making your weak assertion? Just em. . . "believe" ALL - the "blind-faith" thing?[/quote]Well. Let me try another way of bringing us going towards the same direction. We may still not agree, but it is a better sell than what is going on right now. If you make a statement that only was a page long to me as i write them down. Then at a later generation, somebody got hold of what you said as i wrote it down, but sprinkled a little of their own ideas within the body, so that they now come out with 3 pages. In good conscience can you say that this new document of 3 pages is now 100% your statement? You must consider that it has 100% of what you said and other things that the new author made out in your name. This is the condition of the Bible to all m.us.lims.

If you have never read anyone of those prophecies, you don't know what they said - and you have no way of ascertaining your belief! This leaves huge holes in your assertion of "all that the prophets actually said i believe".

I took BK in High school. I guess that does not count.

[Quote]
And that is the more reason I cannot take what Muh.hammad asserted "they said" either! The Qur''an says to believe in ALL of them - no questions asked on that. But you seem adept at playing on words on that injunction while it![/quote]You can now agree with me why the Jews refused to accept the prophethood and messiahship of Jesus? You follow their pattern of denial to a T.

[Quote]
Clever way to excuse yourself from the basic question. This is not another argument on Greek and Hebrew - you have always been sacred of such languages so please stop asking for a bigger bone than you can chew! The translations are available in several languages; but to satiate your request, let me leave you with just a snippet:[/quote]And do you read Hebrew or Aramaic? I don't care about Greek, since none of the prophets in the Bible was greek. Syrup, is it possible for a Yoruba woman to raise a son in yorubaland, but teach him Igbo as his first language? You must have read a novel in your native tongue before, right? If you are a Yoruba person, then Oke langodo will do here. If you read this novel, you will almost believed that there is such a place so named. And there are such characters in this place. But all of that is fiction. Such condition that we find fallacies in the Bible. Confusing, but yet it also says God is not the Author of confusion.



[Quote]
Multiplied versions have also become the norm of the Qur''an today, NO?[/quote]Your argument is in the same pattern as the young woman in England. Well, soon enough the truth will be revealed. But there is not M.uslim who recites Qur.'a.n in any other language except in Arabic. This is Q.u.r.'an.

[Quote]
Okay, going literally by waht you said, can I query that assertion by asking if you "literally" believe in what Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Malachi, Micah and others have TAUGHT? Yes or No? Word games in your next call?[/quote]I literally believe 100% of what they truly said 100%. Then I 100% refuse to accept anything that did not come from them, even though it is ascribed to them. Well if any prophet made a statement, his Lord knows it. He ordained it on him. All of that I take in 100%. I do not know about Malachi, Micah since they are not in the Q.ur'an. They may still be prophets since there were 124, 000 of them.

Tease me!

lol. The tease of the day is that I need a long break. Take care.

@Syrup:

Okay, let me tease you further (why do I have the feeling you're always shaking when typing? )

Your feeling is completely wrong. I may not like typing, but shaking is not one of my things. Baba la wa. Thats an old Gbosa, in the days. I am grateful that i lived and survived all the avalanches.

[Quote]
Where do you find Isaiah's teachings? David's Psalms? Ezekiel's prophecies? Daniel's prophecies? Malachi's, Micah's, Zachariah's prophecies? Where does the Qur''an point to in order to find their prophecies? The Bible![/quote]If you read the writing in the Q.u'r'an about any of the prophets in it and compares it to what is in the Bible, you will never say that they are the same. The Q.ur'an does not look and does not point to the Bible for anything. Lets observe the miracle of the birth of John son of Zachariah for example. In the Q.ur'a.n we see that the three days as sign for the event, whereby Zachariah was unable to speak is different from that of the Bible. In the Qu.r'an, Zachariah was able to make talk and praise God and enjoin others to do so at the dawn and late afternoon prayers. But in the Bible that was not the case. Zachariah was just dumb all through. You will therefore see that in the Qu.r'an the sign was really a miracle upon miracle: He suddenly became unable to speak and then in a certain period he was able to speak so that he could conduct the worship wherein God is being praised.

You're a funny man indeed! Please if you have another source for the teachings of these prophets, could you post them? No, I don't mean glib statements that are far removed from reality - just show me the documents, and then let me read for myself!

Thank God I don't look funny. In teretingly, Micah and Malachi, Ruth, Easter are not in the Q.ur'a.n. And in the Bible, you do not have Luqman. How then you concluded without any second thought that the Bible is copied by the Q.ur'a.n? The Qur.'an declares that all the prophets were Mu.sl.ims. Will not be appropriate for statements that are essential to a complete way of life in I.sl.am be presented?

Jacob forbade himself from eating a certain part of the cattle for example. But I.slam does not forbid any m.us.lim from eating any part of the cattle. An ethnic Jews (Child of Israel) who is a m.usli.m is permissable for him to discard the Jewish food restriction thereof. A christian who becomes a M.u.slim will have to abide by not eating flesh of Pig. Even though this was allowed to him, while he was a christian. How do you figure with just these few examples that Q.ur'an copied the Bible? Are we not the same human race? Should the Q.ur'an leave out the stories of man for the benefit of man, but instead tell the stories of Jinn, Angels and others but not man, to benefit man? This will be absurd, wouldn't it?

Eyin eniyan, E ba mi da si oro yio.

No? You don't have the documents? Then how can you maintain the assertion: "I believe in ALL the prophets"? And then come back with objections at what they taught? Lol. . . Olabowale, you believe zero! Rest your dear heart. Until you produce those documents, you're only making a weak claim!

What documentsare needed? What are you talking about? Only that you need to know that what you said they taught in the Bible is not always they truly taught. Remember you even called paul a prophet? One wonders if the definition of the office of prophethood is truly understand here and no wonder we have all the CAC, Aladuras and the celestials, etc of Nigeria calling themselves Prophets!

[Quote]
No, I am not with you. Paul was a prophet - and I believe it simply so (I am not a mus.lim who goes about denying everything simply because Muh.ammad said so). Afterall, some of you cannot agree about what Muha.mmad said or did not say in what is known as SAHIH hadiths. Muha.mmad was not Jesus, he never saw Jesus, and on that note I can say yes sir, I am with you - Muh.hammad cannot be authority on who Jesus was![/quote]God said that He alone is enough as a Witness for M.u'hamm.ad. That is enough for me. I see that you may object to it. Thats fine as long you are ready for the consequence. And since we know the nature of the prophet (as), we do have objections to what does not sound to be coming from him, on the pages of the ahadith. Come to think of it, we hold the same position when it comes to the claims on the pages of the Bible, too.

If you disagree, no problems. I was only using your own slice and selective rule!

Right. Now you know.

Okay, I am sorry - I did not mean to force your hand! I apologise if you felt pressured (which was why I'm not interested in long arguments).

Okay o.

@Syrup:

Muh.hammad denied that statement and mus.lims suppose it was "God" who denied it! To hold this denial is to effectively deny the prophets who declared them long before the incarnation of Jesus Christ. Denying Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah, Malachi, Daniel and others who made categorical statements akin to such is to effectively deny the prophets and falsify your claim to believe in ALL the prophets - and that is not my problem but yours.

Now you are playing the mind knower of God and also that of Prophet M.u.hamm.ad. And thats just terrible. You need to read Surah Al Maidah where God present a day of Judgement scenerio. God spoke about the dialogue between He and jesus before the presence of mankind. In a nutshell, Jesus said to God, I do not know Your mind (I do not know what You have for the future), but You know my mind (You do know what happens to me and my future). Please read that portion to know that what you are saying is completely off the mark.

I am certain that prophet called God his father. And by the way as a child I had witnessed Christian's drama about the pregnancy of Mary. They always say that Mary was overshadowed by the spirit of God. When they demostrate it, always even now, they always act as if Mary was being mounted. Now if that is not a sexual act, then telle what it is!

Remember, na you they push me o, sisi.

[Quote]
Jesus was not "created" - that point has been made already in other threads. Isl.am may deny it, but that would mean to "prove" your assumptions by the same prism by which you examine the Bible and other prophets. No selective reading does the job for you - rather, it will selectively waste your presumptions![/quote]That makes two uncreated beings; God and Jesus, right? Are there other uncreated beings? Well if this is your understanding of Christian God, I will say that your god did not creat everything. Hence he is a different god from the M.usl.im God Who created everything. You see that we have different understandings of Who, What, etc God is?

[Quote]
Yeah, I heard that so many times - and I was refreshed to follow the thread where the discussion was held about the fact that the Qur''an confirms the Bible! You are desperate to unweave yourself from your dilemma, for if the Qur''an came to confirm the Bible (as was discussed), then where did you get the idea to disparage the same Biblical prophets?[/quote]Qu.r'a.n confirmed what is correct about the Bible. Example is God is truly One Lord. Not multiple headgod. What Qu.r'a.n denies are the falsehood. Example is God having children, dying, being a man, etc. Are we clear now.

You have said nothing worthwhile, Olabowale. I keep my fingers crossed for something more tangible than your desperate assertions.

Be cool.

I dislike the act of keeping fingers crossed. It does not allow the hand to be fully functional. Stop doing it.

@Syrup:

I knew you had such a seething bias before you started typing, and the long drawn-out thesis are disappointing futile already.

And for those whose hearts have been guided, the opposite is what they see. So I can not help you, lady.

[Quote]
Denying what the prophets have stated in order to maintain your bias does not help your case.[/quote]And to ascribe a statement falsely to a prophet will not help your case with God. The truth will be made plain, finally. Let me give you example; God prohibits the eating of the flesh of Pigs, right? Your prophet Paul allows it. Now thats a default. I call Paul your prophet because you referred to him as a prophet. To me he was not a prophet. I hold him in the same light as all the present day "Prophets!"

[Quote]
Moses, Isaiah and some other prophets had no problem seeing God as FATHER. Your problem is that such a term must bring you to sex. Please get a clean mind and stay focused.[/quote]Alleged statements from the prophets. Moses knew that his father was a child of Israel. And by the way, you claimed to be a mother, when does sex becomes something to dirty to the mind and makes the mind unfocused? You are a strange wife, then.

While reading some of your literature, the musl.im friend I alluded to earlier introduced me to what is called the "40 hadiths" (if I remember). However, I was surprised that the nature of all.ah supposes that he could be "hurt" by mere mortals. A specific example is when Muh.hammad states that all.ah was "hurt" because one of the (un-named) sons of Adam denied him! Now, what sets this "all.ah" apart from mere mortals if he could be "hurt" just like anyone else?

Did you see in any place where God was claimed to be the father of any man? Yet God has all the most beautiful names: a minimum of 99 along with A.ll.ah. By the way the names are way more than that, you see.

Yet, God said that when He was hungry, He was not fed. And son of Adam said, oh my Lord when was that, when you are never in need of food? God said if you had fed hungry so and so of the children of Adam, then you would have fed Me. The same applied to clothing from unclothedness (For you the word unclothedness may be dirty, also), and the same applied to visiting the sick. Where should I begin with you?

The prophets have declared that God was known as "FATHER" without any connotations of sex; but why is it that mus.lims MUST always dig in their lewd minds in this subject when there is no suggestion for such? The best simple answer is because you have no rational for denying what the prophets have taught, while at the same time pretending you believe in ALL! This is really a sad case for you, Olabowale - as the term "FATHER" does not suggest sex. The Bible does not teach that, and to make that inference is indeed a hypocritical position you assume.

Lewd minds? Ironically, I called most of my older siblings and uncles and even cousins, father. Truly are they my father? Did I come from the loin of any of them, but the loin of Pa Pakulopa (ra)?

And Gos said in Surah Mariam, " And the claim that God has a son. And their mere saying of it, the heavens were about to fall. The mountains were about to pulverate to dush and the earth was about open up; but God doesnot permit them, even as they lament as such horrible claims made by some children of Adam. This should tie you up pretty good, lady" But God further said in the same Surah Mariam that nothing in heavens or on earth and beyond comes to Him, except as a servant/ slave/ subject. Do you finally get it now, lady?

I begin to think i know who you are. But God knows the truth.

@Syrup:

Let me first make something clear to you: I am not the sort of person who recycles endless arguements, so please leave out your recycling. This very issue has been well discussed, and like I said earlier, I waited endlessly to see how you could ratonally defend what was posted for your consideration - alas! nothing was forthcoming from you.

Secondly, I took some time to search for the relevant thread where answers to your question were given. Please consider the following:

(a) https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-96254.0.html#msg1717749

(b) https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-96254.0.html#msg1717750

(c) https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-96254.0.html#msg1717751

(d) https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-96254.0.html#msg1717752

(e) https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-96254.0.html#msg1717757

After (e) above, I waited to see how you addressed the question posed to you, but although I was coming back several times to see if you had responded reasonably, I could not see how you posted a response to what you had raised.

That is the reason why I was persuaded to feel that so many people are fond on this forum to be recycling issues and presenting them as "new" topics. If you visit those links and have something worthwhile about the question of idolatry being practiced by many Mus.lims, I'd be glad to see it.

You will notice that I did not make any entry around thsi time. I was travelling on a journey. And I do not live on Nairaland. As I read what Pilgrim wrote, I can simply state that she was not far from the truth, in that she stated that the mu.sli.ms deviated from what the prophets said. Further, the prophet (as) confirmed that many m.usl.ims will go to hellfire. 72 different sects of m.u.slim.s will. Only 1 sect will not enter hell, while all the sects of christianity, Jews and all the others will all enter hellfire. Your acciusation is completely baseless. I might have disgreed with Pilgrim in her choice of religion, however she was right because she showed some mu.sl.ims who are practicing what the prophet warned against.


[Quote]
Two things here:

(a) is there a record o a sketch of Jesus?
Ans: I am not aware of any such

(b) if there ever was, and He knew of it, would He not have destroyed it based on a supposed "hot temperament"?
The question is unfortnuately skewed. WHY? Because Jesus was not recorded as having a hot temperament on those who did evil. Example - the woman caught in adultery was indeed an evil thing. What was Jesus' reaction - destroy the woman?[/quote]I guess the overturning of tables of the money changers is with love and sign of endearment and not in anger! Yo simply cherry pick whereever you will. And the crucifix, crosses and the pictures in churches in Ethipia as recorded in Pilgrim's 2006 posting are not signs of pictures and idols/graven images, uh? Please lady, lets be honest here.

I think when you make assumptions, it would help to drop sentiments and be honest and simple. These are values I aprreciate deeply.

Then practice what you preach.

But I should make another point here: Christianity is NOT Isla.m - and we know what Isla.m teaches about such matters of pictures. Christianity does not teach that any artist or painter would go to Hell - but I know how many Mus.lims have shown me records of Mu.hammad's teaching that artists and painters will go to Hell.

Syrup, I think we need to drop all the facade. However, I have to point to you that all mankind will be judged by God, using the same exact yardstick. Those who believe Him, those who do not, be they M.us.lim or not will be judged as human being and not like animals. The M.usl.ims will be judged differently from the others. Please bear that in mind.

[Quote]
The reason why Jesus overturned tables was clear - those who were buying and selling in the Temple had turned worship into a robbery - please read it for yourself (Matthew 21:13). I don't see how that should now be stretched to include destroying paintings that had nothing to do with your assumptions.[/quote]Worship into robbery? How, except that they were charging interest or short cahnging the customers? Now was it not part of the 10 commandments that there should not be a graven image made or worship? Tell me what do the christians do with the cross or the paintings in the churches, now? I am not going to even talk about the statue of Mary with the catholics. And i do have respect for the catholics more than the proptestants. Well I will not even talk about the celestial and the CAC, etc of Nigeria.

[Quote]
That is why I am seeking for clear facts - especially facts in your presumptions. What I read quite often are glib statements. For example, where is it recorded that Jesus would have destroyed pictures? Any hard facts or pointers beyond your mere assumptions and presumptions?[/quote]From the way Jesus overturned the table of the money changers, it is very clear that if he saw a single imagery of him, he would have torned or destroyed it. Or is thou shall not make or worship a graven image not part of the 10 commandments? You will now have to present a possible argument to go against my aso called assumptions and presumptions.

@Syrup:

You will not interest me by going round in circles and saying the same things that are not helping your case. Which is why I will only summarise your views and ask the same basic questions again.

I am laughing, because I thought my evening will not be as gruesome. But I have to give time to Madam Syrup.

[Quote]
I gave a few examples. Are you going to say that what each prophet said in those examples are true? If you cannot hold your ground here, please refrain from postulating what you have no intention of sustaining sincerely.[/quote]First i did not see your list of examples. But whatever they were, if any disagrees with the Q.ur'an, guess what, it is already rejected. now you know my stand.

[Quote]
I agree. In which case, if I read the direct quotes of those prophets I referenced in the earlier examples, and then you come back later and disavow them, you effectively render your case meaningless again.[/quote]Pay attention to my statement again: I know what a prophet says. I know what can be claimed that a prophet said, which is not correct. Those statements that are claimed to have been said by a prophet that are contrary to the ways of God from the beginning can never be correct.

[Quote]
Jesus also said that He is the Son of God - John 9 & 10 as earlier. That does not contradict God's uniqueness, His person, His power and His revelation (especially when the OT prophets prophetically declared that God was kown as FATHER). Does "Son" and "FATHER" correlate with the same teachings of the prophets? If yes, why did Muh.hammad deny that revelation?[/quote]If God has a child, then what sets Him apart from anyone? If God dies, as you had claimed Jesus did as human, what sets Him apart from the rest of us? When you use the word father for God, either from the old or the new testaments, I wonder who God mounted and got pregnant? Yet He created Adam without any parents. He created Eve from Adam, but changed her nature, specifically her gender. Yet you can not see that this God is Mighty that no one can truly be His child, as your children are your husband's child? Which woman represents your position with your husband, when it comes to the fatherhood of god?

God Almighty denied this statement by first talking about the humanness of Mary and then Jesus. God said that He commands what he decrees. So the creation of jesus is like the creation of adam. It is only commanded to be, so it became!

You see, this is the problem you have. You only wish Muh.hammad's statements to be "true" and his denials to be true at the same time - as long as you can comfortably deny teachings of the Biblical prophets even though the Qur''an asks you as a mus.lim to believe in them!

I do not wish anything to be apart from its place. The Q.ur'an is true, 100%. What is true about the teaching of what you call the Biblical prophet can never be different from the Q.ur'an. However, there are alot attributed to these Biblical prophets by many. Those statements may be comforting to you, the reality is that they are all false.

You see your dilemma?

I see my dilemma. I hope you see yours?

[Quote]
Again, this does not come close.[/quote]We are at an impasse. What I said was that those statement that are attributed to Jesus are not from him. Therefore, they are completely incorrect.

God's visibility was clearly revealed to MOSES, the seventy elders of Israel, other prophets like ISAIAH, and the patriarchs!! If someone else therefore comes as late as the 5th or 6th century denying these clear revelations, he is the one who stands suspect.

If God was going to reveal Himself to Moses, He would have done it at the burning bush. God is not holding authority which must be believed, only and when you see Him! Even only the prophets saw Angels in their Angelic states. To claim that the elders of Israel along with Moses saw god is very blaspemous, considering that the same elders asked Moses not to let God talk to them directly, because they fear that they will die if they hear His voice!

Let me explain. The Qur''an is believed to have come through Muh.hammad and no other mus.lim received anything thereafter. Now supposing another Great One comes along claiming he had a revelation that denies Muh.ammad's words, would you call them naive? To do so is to assume a cultish loyalty that you cannot defend - the very same thing I have been pointing out all this time.

Now put yourself in the place that you are trying to plant me. You will see that you are the one that has the cultist viewpoint. Exactly the viewpoints of the Jews towards Jesus. But it has been 1400 years and climbing and no one has claimed a new religion. Even here in America, the Mormons and Seventh day Adventist ae look at as false christians. I have not even touched up on the Jehovah witnesses.

So, sum up:

   (a) the Biblical prophets made categorical claims about God
   (b) centuries later, "another prophet" comes to DENY those claims
   (c) without sound reason, you fall for the later prophet and reject the earlier ones (bias)
   (d) yet, you cannot defend why you rejected those earlier prophets
   (e) yet again, you still play the mind-games of asserting that you believe in ALL the prophets
   (f) when scrutinized, it turns out you only made the statement, but do not actually believe it
   (g) so, your "ALL" translates into "SOME"
   (h) and yet, the Qur''an reprimands those mus.lims who behave in such manner

You missed the point completely. Please rea Surah Al Maidah, Ambiyyah, Mariam, Isra, Saffa. Or simply google Jesus in the Q.ur.an and read all about him. That should solve your problems.

Olabowale, WHERE do you stand in your dilemma? If you cannot hold it up to light, then stop trying to waste your time seeking to cut corners with it. I'm sorry, but you are still falsifying your premise and playing mind-games.

I wonder where you get all these ideas? Am sure they are not from me. I guess that if i tell you that Nigeria the most advanced country in the world, you will believe it. But the reality is that it is true that Nigeria is a country, but claiming that it is the most advanced copuntry in the world, will be false. This is the problem we are facing with your Biblical statements. We in I.s lam believe in all the prophets and I said that there were 124, 000 of them. However to claim that all that were said in the bible, all of it were from prophets, that will be false. We see that paul had something said in the bible. Definitely, paul was not a prophet and he was not Jesus. Also, the disciples were not prophets and no one of them was Jesus! Are you with me lady? Good!

Is it ALL or SOME?

I believe in all the prophets. But what a prophet did not say, I can not accept it coming from the prophet. You are forcing my hand. Take it easy with me, woman. lol.

You see, if I were you, I would rather take the simple and respectful position that babs787 took. He was intelligent enough to understand that I wasn't seeking a debate of endless theories - afterall, I have asked so many mus.lims the same thing ("ALL" or "SOME" and they have simply stated their points. Unfortunately, you're desperately seeking to solicit as babs787's amanuensis and doing such a poor job standing on clear ground.

Okay, lady. Whatever suits you.

Anyhow, enjoy.

You, too. lol.

Is Syrup back on the forum?


Nice to have you back once again. . . . Where have you been all the while?

Regards.

@ Pa Olabowale,

How you dey too oh? How is babs747?

Baba Agba. Oku lailai. Oku jo meta.  You saw me using Orishi rishi, here and there, in my posts. Bawo? I wish you well.

@Syrup

Where did I make such a charge against you precisely in those words? Please quote the line.

When you continue to badger me with all or some about my believe in prophets. You forgot that I stated the what a prophet truly stated is diffrerent from what a prophet did not state, but ascribed to him anyway. The later is falsehold while the former is truth. But both of them are different from the prophet. But going by just speech, if that is how you measure my believing in prophethood, then all that the prophets actually said i believe. What they did not do or said I do not believe if they are even attached to them. What you must never forget is that Jesus or any of those prophets is not around to confirm  or deny anything ascribed to them.

[Quote]
I gave a few - you had problems with them. How can I take you seriously?[/quote]lol. I guess revelation in the sense of the books: Torah, Psalm and the New Testament. Where did you show me a copy in Sematic language? The exact copy before versions, editions, revisions became the norm of what we have in christianity up till now? We are talking pass each other. It is very clear to me now. I guess you are interpreting what I said. You should take what i said literally. Please interpretation will make you miss the mark.

Please rest your misgivings. . . so far, you seem to be adept at playing these word-games and arriving at nothing fruitful. If something more cogent could be offered, I'd be glad to consider it.

Hey, you are funny.

@Syrup: I could truly sum up your confusion about Q.ur'an injuction in the belief of all the prophets: What each prophet said is true. What other people say that the prophet said may or may not be accurate.

Let set up an example for each so that you can get the gist of the agreement of disagreement:

Jesus is reported to have said that his lord God is the same Lord God of his audience (Mark 12 verse 29). Now that is true because it goes in the same line of Oneness of God.

Jesus was also reported to have said that he is a diety. This is a fllacy because it completely goes against many verses of the Bible that point to the invisibility of God or His not dying Superior state, etc. The Qur'a.n also points to this Invisibility and all the other Superior to man qualities of God.

M.usl.ims are required to believe all the Books of the prophets and their words and actions. These were supposed to be in their uncorrupted, and pure states. You do not have that in the Christian Bible today. Since Paul was not Jesus, we can not take his speech to be the speech of Jesus. We can not take his letters to be the letters of Jesus. Yet these and others are what you are alluding to Jesus.

Although I am not a Musl.im and never was one, recent events (including the debates on nairaland) made me read the Qur.an out of mere curiosity. The astonishing thing I found was unmistakably simple - most of the assumptions posted and held by mus.lims like yourself are false and even go so far to contradict what is stated in the Qur''an.

You must be able to post just 1 or just a few, for discussion.

If anyone is "attributing" anything to Jesus, we find loads of such things in your hadith - and we can also use your own principle and safely conclude that all we find there are false. By the same stretch, you can apply the same rule to your accusation that the statements in the Bible cannot be trusted - what you need to understand is that the Qur''an clearly says that it came to confirm the Biblical records (not cast doubts on them). I think that particular argument has been well settled in another thread - and I was disappointed that you didn't have anything meaningful to contribute in that thread.

Maybe I did not see why I should contribute. The problem here is that there are people who better knowledge of i.sl.am than me on Nairaland. When they say things that I know and their argument is superior than mine, i simple read and learn from it. Let me help both of us; during the time of Moses, the person who best knew him among his community was his brother, Aaron because he was also a prophet. So during the time of Jesus, John and his father zachariah knew him more than the other rabbis at that time. Why? The father and son were also prophets! Muh.am.m.ad the last of all the prophets knew each and everyone of them before him, very intimately. How? His Teacher was God Almighty. His Tutor was Angel Gabreil.

One more point: if you keep up this idea of denying the Bible because you cannot trust what it teaches, then by extension you have put yourself in a serious dilemma - because your qu''ran asserts that you must believe in ALL the prophets. There is no way you can claim to believe in ALL the prophets when you cast doubts on what the same prophets have taught!

And no prophet taught anybody that he is god! No prophet taught anyone that he is son of God, as your children are the children of your husband! And the Q.ur'an states all that I have stated.

Does the qur''an make a vacant assessment for people like you to excuse yourself for believing in "SOME" of the prophets instead of "ALL"? If at all you believe in ALL, you have no objections to make against ANY of them! To raise such objections immediately renders your assertion of ALL as a tidy bit of meaninglessness.

Syrup, where did i claim that a prophet is not a prophet? Where did I claim that the true words and deeds of a prophet i do not belief? Even what Q.ur'a.n abrogated from the actions of the Prophets, we are still to have the belief of it! Our thought and actions are not compartible, lady. Please get me a revelation that goes so far back to each prophet, in the language that they were revealed. You will see me taking everything in. But of course, such a revelation to the prophets from the children of israel can not be found.

@Pastor AIO:

Before this becomes another christian vs. great one's argument I want to bring attention to the actually phrase 'bearing witness'. To witness something is to experience it. To claim something that you have not witnessed is to bear false witness. To claim that angel jibril dictated the qu'ran when you did not witness it is bearing false witness. However to say it is merely your beleif would not be.
This applies to those christians to who have merely an intellectual understanding of biblical doctrine. Christ is an experience and if you do not have that experience but speak of it then you are bearing false witness.

I want you to turn everything you said around, Pastor. You will find that your statement is very one sided and terrible and completely shows dishonesty. I will not equate Prophet M.uh.amma.d (as) with the numerous "inspired" writers of the Bible, after the fact. Afterall, the Bible is still going through the ever changing, never stable versions, editions, revisions! This alone kills every argument that you could ever muster! There are evidences that shows the 100% veracity of the Q.u.r'an. I may not have been alive when M.u.hammad was receiving the relelation. Neither were you alive when Jesus was alive in Bethlemen, in his glowing robe! The difference between you and me is that I catually dreamt of M.uh.ammad and the dream, though ws in 2002, was always like last night in my memory. There is an ahadith about seeing M.uh.ammad in a dream. But there is nothing that you can use in the Bible that can equal that. Afterall, Jesus was not even a christian, so your argument is from a wrong and incorrect camp site.




syrup

Which is the same thing that can be attributed to the words of Muh.hammad - every single line he spoke about knowing Jesus Christ are mere falatious statements by that same rule. You cannot pick and choose what to believe and what to deny by calculation and design.

Except that what Jesus said and not what is attributed to him is 100% true. Remember that i said that what is claimed by others, as they put the words in his mouth. That shows that he actully was not the speaker, but somebody who wants his opinion to have weight, there attributed it to him.

The same applies to M.uh.ammad. There is an ahadith that indicates that those who attributes things to him, which he did not do or say should take their place in the hellfire.

I believe in the statement that are recorded in those verses - and if those statements pose serious problems for you, it is not my call. "Blind faith" is something which has become a glib cliche to many these days that it only makes me wonder if those who use that ducker have anything tangible to say. If one holds such fallacious theories (a clever tool to willfully deny something you don't like), then my simple query is this: what statement could YOU defend 100% as factual in your own perusals?

For your accusation to actually work with me or any m.us.lim, we have to totally deny the existence of Jesus. This we do not do. But at the same time, we are not in the business of exagerations, either. I do defend what is 100% factual and that is very clear in our dialogue, so far. I hope you see it and not be blinded again by blind faith. I can't help the usage as it is appropriate in this case.

It is not enough to point accusing fingers simply because you are standing on the other side of the bridge. Look closely, 3 fingers are pointing back at you (a Nigerian proverb I learnt recently).

The application is totally irrelevant here.

Quote from: olabowale on Today at 07:32:04 PM
Further, if there is any verse that is contrary to this statement, above, it even raises more cloud to any possible accuracy of it.

Okay.

Since your response is a simple "Okay," are we in agreement or this is your own way of shock and jiving.

This is why you seriously need to clearly drop your assumptions. I can answer and at the same time waste your assumptions. HOW?

(a) Jesus never once claimed that He is both the FATHER and the Holy Ghost in one shot. That is sadly a cheap and unfair presumption to make. If you have a verse for that, could you offer sincerely to quote it?

(b) in natural human palance, we could say that a "son" could be a "father". My husband is the father of our children, but he is also son to his parents. BUT here is something distinct in our discussion - such analogies do not apply to Jesus (remember I said "human palance?"

(c) but the Son is not something that Christians devised recently - unless Mus.lims want to DENY the Old Testament (which the Qur.an verifies). where do you stand?

Where should i begin with you here? So if every one of the places where "son" was used in the old Testament is taking into context here, how then the christians actually attach such a greater importance to the "son" used by Jesus? More importantly, don't you see therefore that using 'son' as a terminology does not therefore translate to being "True son" to God, but just a term of endearment, the same as being subject to God, but higher than the other creations, eg the animals?

Well, I don't know about you, my father was the son of his parents and the husband of his wives. When he died, all those separate titles died with him. My mother wept because her husband died. I wept because my father died. There was no time that my father died and my mother's husband remained alive! Not even one moment. Get it now?

People's views differ on so many things - politics, religion, science, or other worldviews. Not all Musl.ims are agreed about their own beliefs - could I then make a case for your own "tampoline" and heavy hot-air-balloon?

I think it is only fair to save your readiness to attack people's views when you can't defend yours.

Am sorry if i offende you. I thought that I am using my belief in the Qu.r'a.n as a base for my disapproval of the saviorship, sonship, godship, etc of Jesus. Remember I have held the belief that he, Jesus was a prophet. So this is my view and the view of all m.us.lims.

[Quote]
That is a funny thing with you. Here is the fact:

(a) Jesus clearly said that He is the Son of God (as quoted earlier).
(b) syrup agrees and affirms that claim
(c) olabowale accuses me of a "DENIAL"?

That is laughable. It is Mus.lim themselves who are making the DENIAL - and I don't see how you should be so desperate to assume these false accusations against me.[/quote]The (a) as you quoted, is the example of putting words in the mouth of Jesus. When this is pointed out to you, you refused to see it! Thats now your BIG Problem. A mistake.

[Quote]
Funny thing - I just could ask myself the same questions about how Muh.hammad knew that those he claimed to have spoken to were Moses, Jesus, and others in the Bible? HOW do you defend that kind of thing with your selective reading?[/quote]Since we realise that Jesus actual speech is now mared in fallacies, then we have to rely on the authority; The Q.ur'an which is the unaduterated speech of God Almighty alone, and the Sunnah of Mu.hammad (as). Remember i have not used the speech of the companions of Mu.hammad or the generation that followed them. But we see in the Bible what we can consider to be a rough speech of god, then of the prophets, then of the companion of the prophets (in the case of Jesus, his disciples) and the speech and even letters of the generation that came after this (Paul is a good example of this)

[Quote ]
What kind of "God" are you talking about? A "god" who cannot raise the dead is actually a "god". Sorry, Olabowale. . . I believe in the resurrection - and I think you claim here is quite unisla,mic.

[/quote]For a person to be ressurrected, he/she will have to died, a complete death. We are not talking about ressucitation here. In Isl.am, it is known that jesus was not crucified and was not killed. How could I then be un.isl.amic?

[Quote]
Again, HOW can you "prove" that Muh/hammad saw them 100%?

Read Surah Isra (Children of israel), verse 1 of it. Then read Surah Najm (The Star). Read the tafsir as you go along. It is now easy to find things and information about islam by simply googling it. You can ask the Question on the Google if Muhamma.d saw the prophets; Jesus and Moses, etc as your topic for the search. You will be amazed.

But what will you do when you finally find the answer to your inquiries? Are you still going to cling to the fabulous fallacy?

My regards to your husband and children.

@Ayiba1: May Alla.h make it easy for you. Amin. If anyone holds the salvation of another man, M.uha.mmad (as) would have been able to convert two people: both of them his Uncles.

Abu Jahal who died in the battle of Badr. The prophet prayed that an Umar (ibn Khattab or Abu Jahal) come to strengthen i.sl.am by his conversion. All.ah knows the hearts of mankind, so Ibn Khattab was the one that became mu.slim. And the importance of the second Kalifah was not be underscored by a single textbook of his life history. M.uh.ammad (as) was reported to have said that it there were to have been a prophet after him, it would have been Umar! Thats how important Umar was.

We knew the end of Abi Talib; he refused to accept Is.lam on his dying bed, because of the pride of his heritage! Such a warped thinking that heritage is even important after death! It was Abu jahal who walked in and acted as the shayatin against Abu Talib's single shahadah. Even if he had said simple; oh Mu.hamm.ad, my dear nephew, that statement of there is no god worthy of worship except All.ah, the Almighty, I will not say it. That would have been enough for Muha.mm.ad to seek intercession before the Most Merciful All.ah T aala, in the day of judgement.

One thing you must be hopeful for; God Almighty All.ah can turn her heart back to I.sl.am, again. There are evidence that a person can apostate I.sl.am and still come back to it. The sequences of apostasy is even more than one time. All we can do is to pray for her and if you have a chance to be around her is to be a good person. Show as much mercy as possible towards her.

A person who is destined for hellfire will get into it, even if paradise is just a distance of an arm length. So does a soul that is destined for paradise will change even if hellfire is just a distance of an arm length.

We ask God Almighty to alleviate her condition(s) and in the long run that she turns back to the path of success. Amin. And also help all of us with strong Iman to be able to withstand the difficulties that we may face. Amin.

We also pray from the nonmu.sli.ms who have good hearts to find success and be guided to the path of true Belief. Amin.

@Syrup:

Let me give you an example: Jesus Christ clearly referred to Himself as the Son of God (please see John 9:35-37 and 10:36).

Now Olabowale, where do you stand in those statement - do you stand to DENY those statements? If you do, then the consequences are dire indeed. Please carefully consider that DENIALS are even worse than accusations.

Bless you.

Please consider that John 9; 35 to 37, and John 10; 36 can never be proven 100% without the usual ambiquity of the blind faith to be words coming from Jesus. Further, if there is any verse that is contrary to this statement, above, it even raises more cloud to any possible accuracy of it. How can son be father and ghost all in one shot? Then some of you even present the possibility that he, Jesus was Melchezdek, all the while before, during and after his time on earth! You are shrouding this mystery in heavy clothing. More like crush velvet and tampoline than shear material.

The denial of through is coming from you who witnessed falsehood agaianst an innocent man. Sometimes ago a nairalander talked about jesus talking to Moses and Elijah. I just could not but ask myself how he knew that these people were Moses and Elijah? Was Jesus telling them that these people were who the christians say they were? Do you not wonder that God Almighty will not be raising dead prophets up to show ordinary men?

Muh.amm.ad who saw all of them in his Isra wa Miraj did not tell any m.isl.im that these people were ever raised up for the viewing of any one, except in the company of prophets: and he m.uh.am.m.ad was the last of them.

@Syrup: Please tell me with certain clarity, not the usual inuendos, how I.s.lam is idolatry? Remember i have made salah in a church in Manhattan. Yet my salah is acceptable, InshaAllah.

Further, could you tell me if there is a record that a mere rendering, sketching, painting or photographing of jesus was every made. If there is and Jesus knew of it, would you summise that he would not have destroyed it based on the hot temperament that is recorded for him, about pople who do evil? We will need to remember that he overturned the table of the exchangers even in the visinity (plaza) of the temple. Or would not the picturing/muralling or any of the image making not against one of the ten commandments?

Syrup, just the way that the christians level accusations and do not provide evidences could not be deemed acceptable by fair minded people. That is if there is one. But God Almighty is enough as a Witness of His truth, which He sent each prophet with.

This story above reminds me of the hadith where there are instances lying are acceptable. The three mentioned are a man telling an ugly spouse that she is very pretty. We all know that a husband who tells his wife that she is as ugly as a bush baby can expect many a night of frozen back!

The second is a friend who is bringing duelling friend to a peaceful resolution by lying to encourage that reunion. You can imagine having tow close friends becoming enemies, while you are still their friend. How well will you enjoy your outing, where the two of them are there, each needing your 100% attention?

The last one is when your support your troop by your propagandas. You might actually avert even a drop of blood, because the enemy may capitulate because of fear of being defeated and suffering so much casualities.

Huxley, this is the only thread that I think you have ever been reasonable. I see the Chindler's list in your Jews/Nazis storyline, above. To lie is very appropriate in this case. The reason is that so many lives are saved. And there is trememdous benefit in saving lives. I still harbor hope for you, Huxley. Someday, God will switch your heart to a believing heart. It is pure except God id not in it, yet.

@Syrup: Lying against Jesus, is a false witnessing. The consequences are dire. Knowing that Jesus was a man, a prophet, a messiah to the children of Israel, alone, never started a religion and never asked anyone to start one, etc, are bearing false witnessing against him.To deitify him is false witnessing.

@ Pastor AIO: Welcome, man.

From what little I know of human psychology I do not expect Olabowale to change his mentality after reading this. Why? Because humans don't like being challenged like that. Even if he did see your point he would consider it a loss of face to concede.

I guess that every airplane accident that were averted without the picture or the name of Jesus will also be attributed to Jesus, then? If you can not make such a claim, then, the role of Jesus in the safe landing of a plane near the moral/painting of "Jesus" (and when we say that you are idol worshippers, there is that uproar against us! Is picture not an image making? Was camera available before or during the life of Jesus?), is Zero! It has been proven that the mere arrest of Jesus, according to the Bible was something Jesus did not want. And a proof was that he prayed against it. And his death was also something he did not acept willingly, as a sacrificial lamb. No sir. You know ita nd I also know it from your Bible that he lamented that he was not saved! How then that he could not save his own life and you are saying that he saved others?

How many a people have perished calling Jesus names and the result was the same as if they never called him? How many were saved who would not mention Jesus names except as a prophet, like any other prophets? Couldn't have been just that God the Almighty has not willed the souls of these people to be returned to Him, that He allowed them to live another Days? Who is the One that can really save a soul, Jesus or the One that Jesus cried up to? The One that Jesus cried up to is the One that I worship!

I also think that if you mean well in trying to explain to him christianity that you could adopt a less adversarial tone. This is not about who wins, or one up manship. This is about truth and salvation.

Pastor, now apply truth and salvation to your life. Who is the truth; Jesus or the God who sent Jesus? Who is the possessor of salvation; Jesus or the God that sent Jesus? Pastor hang around me for a while. InshaAllah the words of god will affect your heart. The only reason that you christians hang on a hope in a person who can not even save himself, according to your Bible narative, is because you are not capable of accepting responsibility for your own deeds. Please remember that it is the Christians who will go to Jesus in the day of Judgement and they will be surprised when he shunned them. This is according to your Bible. The M.u.sl.ims for sure are not the people who the Bible ascribes this seeking saviour relationship from Jesus to! Please let us all use our marbles/macaronis/scrambled eggs.

@Davidylan: lol.

I know why such a miracle pains you to the marrows. You've never heard of a mu'slim prayer being answered before,

Alhaji dear, our God is ALIVE!

Your god died. You know he flipped flooped, right?

Now my prayers are answered daily. And I will prove it to you this weekend. Watch. lol.

@Welli: I know the God who is not the dying god. That Almighty God is Who I worship. And I am the first in my home in Manhattan to be a Mus.l.im. How do you like that?

Oh you gullible souls! You think a common sign had anything to do with this? I wonder why the thief that was hanged with "Jesus," died and "Jesus" did not save him? At least he should have done a last one for the road miracle with the thief that believed him, right? You people are almost behaving like cultists. And those Christians who died were allowed to die by Jesus, uh?

And according to your Bible, Jesus could not even save his own soul, even as he begged in his prayer for this "Cup" to be removed from his head. Think people! Don't go about the places blind.