Olabowale's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Olabowale's Profile › Olabowale's Posts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 (of 214 pages)
 Christianity Etc › Re: John 1:1 - LOGOS and THEOS by olabowale(m): 1:24pm On Feb 20, 2008 |
@Lafile: Quote from: stimulus on February 18, 2008, 01:47 PM"PUNK," is not a term of endearment. I hope you and Stimulus who you referred as "PUNK," here know that! The reason am not wasting my time with stimulus is that we started with Trinity, he is taking me to John. I am not going to go from thread to thread with him. If he is so sure of Trinity, then lets dig into it on it at its thread. @Holythug: May God make your way easy. Amiin. You see these people just say Jihad as if it is just fighting people. Jihad is stopping yourself from doing evil. And that is the biggest form of it. But I am sure it does not ring a bell on them, because they are always about id (the animal instinct). |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Jesus, Man Of Contradiction: Was Jesus For Everyone, Including Non-jews? by olabowale(m): 1:09pm On Feb 20, 2008 |
@Therationa: I will take it that any contradiction is not from Jesus, but from the Bible writers, alone. Jesus was a man of God, a messenger and a true prophet. A prophet of Is'lam, he was (as). |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Jesus, Man Of Contradiction: Was Jesus For Everyone, Including Non-jews? by olabowale(m): 1:04pm On Feb 20, 2008 |
@4Him; Matthew 10:5-6My friend, please defend the contradiction in the Bible. If I were put in the same position, as concerning the Al Qur'an, I will defend it by a simple verse concerning abrogation: Al Rahman says in HisBook, that He abrogates a verse by another verse. So as it comes to the law of retaliation; equality is prescribed, if you wish to retaliate because of pain, or take financial compensation instead or just the best way is to forgive, without the first two ways. Come to think of it, the state of california sued O. J. Simpson for the possibilty of double murder, wich he won by the famous late Attorney Johnnie Cochran's if it does not fit, you must acquit. But the Goldman family sued civilly and won monetary damages of close to 30 Million USD. Even the USA, a non Is'lamic society recognises the merit of Is'lamic justice. But just to not tell us how two completely opposing sections of the Bible are from Jesus will definitely tell us that one section is wrong, but definitely, the two can not be wrong. And in fairness to Isa bin Mariam, His Lord will not allow him to make two conflicting statements, and will not allow him to forget or err. I want you to explain it or at least attempt to do it. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: On The Prophesy Of The Virgin Birth Of Jesus, Part 2: by olabowale(m): 12:33pm On Feb 20, 2008 |
@Therationa: Virgin birth is not an impossibility. Afterall, intercourse is not the only way to get pregnant. There is artificial insemination, etc. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Have You Praised Him Yet, Today? by olabowale(m): 12:23pm On Feb 20, 2008 |
@Stimulus: This is not the thread to discuss your misgivings - and I've shown that anyday, anytime I can match your arguements to a logical end! Trying to use Muhammad's denials to patronize me is a waste of time, resources and effort on your part. If he qualified himself as a false prophet and died as such, no amount of weasle cough from you can reverse his fate.Only i your mind you've well. Patronizing you is never my intention: bringing you to sense and sensibility is what I am doing. Yet Muhammad is the only one that the Almighty will permit to intercede on behave of all true behavior. And I swear by the Almighty Creator on that. Neither Jesus or any other previous prophets or messengers will have that honor over Muhammad bin Abdallah (as). I thought this place is to tell you about praising and prayer: Praise the One who Created you and pray to Him as well. To praise another or pray to or through another (creation) along with the Creator is inself idolatry. And thats you are doing in a subtle way. The least I can do is to tell you about it. @skyone (m) Does it mean you are pleased with your children's misbehaviour? What will you do to a son of yours who has killed his siblings plus other children, steals and constantly raping under-age girls; i guess report him to the authority so that he can be kept in the prison before he turns round and kill you. This is the beauty of hell fire, hell is for the sinners and heaven is for the righteous therefore you have a choice to make.I read your story above and its quite amasing, though. All of the sins this fella in your story is against his soul, but all the evil acts had been against other beings, like him. But God is truly different and unlike human in all respect. He can not be killed, raped, tortured, etc. I guess your story and my rebuttal should wake you up that if all of these evils are impossible to be brought upon God, yet Jesus was killed, after so much torture by the "Jews," according to you Christians and your Bible, then he could never be God! But God Almighty accepts sincere repentance and forgives the repenting soul (like a man from the Children of Israel who killed 100 people), except the one who is repenting when the reality of death is already in place (like Pharaoh who perished in the sea under the miraculous victory that God gave Moses). I guess the Bible is lacking in sincere process of repentance and forgiveness, just in the same way it lacks the true understanding of Unity of God. Let me ask you, is there anything else that you can disbelief in apart from Jesus being more than a prophet/Messenger (as), that will make you a person that will be in the lake of fire? Is there anything else you can belief in apart from Jesus being what Christian calls Jesus that will make a person inherit the kingdom of God? Please explain your reasons for your answers. In other words; will a person go to paradise if he believes God Almighty and take jesus as a prophet like every other prophets/messengers before him? And will the person person who believes that Jesus is saviour but dis believes the existence of God or His absolute power (which is exactly what Christian believes) go to hell? Are you talking about a.llah here or Jehovah( the biblical God)? Accusing or calling God a lier is not adviseable, don't curse yourself to death.I am neither talking talking about the Mus'lim God Almighty Creator who is One nor am I talking about Him in any named language, be it in Hebew (Jehovah) or even in my native language Yoruba (Olorun), but am talking about all kind of disbelievers and idolators god, gods. Take your pick. And please be serious. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Don't Replace The Word "A.L.L.A.H" With God, They Are Not The Same by olabowale(m): 1:25am On Feb 20, 2008 |
@Stimulus: Of course, there are - and that is quite an unneccessary and rhetorical question! The problem here is that you guys have tried to mangle their language, cheated yourselves with Deedat's fallacies, and hope that everyone would celebrate the same false assumptions that your scholars manufactured by confusing Greek terms!And there are no Greek Mus'lims in Greece? You always show how naive your thinking is. Just in the same way that you have arab Christians, who by their religious tenets disagree with the prophet who is from their bloodline, you have Greek who are Mus'lims and understand God, god differently from how the Christians understand them. And by the way, there was no prophet who was Greek and there was no revelation in that language, none at all. It will not be surprising to get a weak meaning or misunderstand, the thorough meaning of a word in the language of revelation, when translated to a foreign or other languages. Afterall, Geek will be other or foreign tongue to the ancient in the time of revelations Children of Israel, as a whole. I wonder if an old igbo word is translated to yoruba, will still carry the same weight with the Igbo man if he is also fluent in Yoruba language? Let me give an example: Chineke to Oluwa? Since i do not speak Igbo, my understanding of Chineke may be equated to Oluwa. But there is a possibility that they are not the same exact words, in meaning and in depth. This is your problem, Stimulus, since none of you have ever seen a Torah from th time of Moses, or a Sabuur from the time of Daud or even an Injil from the time of Isa bin Mariam (as Jamiah)! There is nothing sure from what you have, today. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Don't Replace The Word "A.L.L.A.H" With God, They Are Not The Same by olabowale(m): 1:05am On Feb 20, 2008 |
@SysUser: You need to get out more often. I think to be seditenry in Ibadan, a city some part of my life in (Imale falafia, Oke Ado), will not give you the true picture of the Is'lam, the Mus'lim community outside the old countries. You see in the new world, the so called, west, there are lots of her citizenries who are not Christians, but Mus'lims. And their mother tongue, while yours is Yoruba, probably, is English. In England, we have the former 70s rocker Cat Stevens who is now Yusuf Islam. And In America, you have Shelkh Hamza Yusuf of Zaitunah institute in Hayward, not too fatr from Oakland California. He is a White American and actually an authority in Arabic language. Then you have Sheikhs Zaid Shakir, a black man who is also a University professor. Then you have world renowned Suraj Wahhaj of At Taqwa Masjid on the corner of Bedford and Fulton, in Bed Stey Brooklyn. Yet you have Sheikh Yusuf Estes, a daiyy who is a White Texan. I will not forget to mention Sheikh Abdallah Faruok of Boston. Now all of these individuals call their Creator God in their native tongue, English. How do you justify that these people should not say God when they are discussing with family or acquittance, especially when such a declaration is coming from you whose language is not even English? Could you tell any Yoruba Mus'lim person not to say Olorun Oba, Oluwa, Eledumare, etc, knowing fully well that he/she is not referring to your 3 godhead God? People who hear you make such a declaration will think that you are not to be taken seriously. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 4:30pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@M_Nwankwo: As much as I disagree with you, I at the same commend you for your maturity. When i read and know people like you are products of Nigeria, I long for the place, on one hand and then i struggle, personally to improve myself! Hellfire is created for some human being to inhabit it, yet some will not go to it for they have done well with their Creator: Worshipping Him the way He has prescribed and doing a much good as possible. For me, I am not a Christian and I believe in the messengership of all Prophets and messengers, before the Prophet from Makka and Madina (as). Yet when the Christians derided him, we simply or at least try to ask them to explain themselves? To talk about the Qur'an, you are at least should learn about the process of revelations of its content. There are over 6000 verses in it. And none of it ws revealed without a clear reason. I dislike thuggery and it seems as if thats how many of my people, the Nigerian carry out their persona. This is th only reason I wanted the Trinity explained in relationship to all the other verses which negate the possibility of it. For instance, Mark 12 Verse 29, is a glearing example. But I thank you for throwing in your matured hat. And I liked the way you saw Soul and Spirit as one in a man. Meaning man is made up of Body and soul/spirit. And when the soul/spirit is extracted, then the result is a lifeless body. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Don't Replace The Word "A.L.L.A.H" With God, They Are Not The Same by olabowale(m): 4:04pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@Ayobase: God is just an arabic wordI wa going to ignore you, but I thought I should caution you to lie just a little, which is the norm of the Kiriyos. o lie this blatantly is a pathetic. O je ma je ki awon oga e gbo iso kuro so nso yi, lemu e. Kia ni won ma di eru e ati wo soko pada sile yoruba. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Don't Replace The Word "A.L.L.A.H" With God, They Are Not The Same by olabowale(m): 3:57pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@Stimulus: And there are no Greek in this universe anymore, including a country known as Greece? You have a lot to learn. Instead of answering his questions, you copped out, as expected. You see I did not say that you you are a laugh and a pitiful fool of a man. But I almost said it. then I cautioned myself. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: John 1:1 - LOGOS and THEOS by olabowale(m): 2:53pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
Somebody already asked you, to give provide us with a definition of your God: Is your God Jesus, or the holy spirit or the father? He also said if he were to meet a Christian Greek and to ask him; Whats the name of your God, will the greek give the name as Tontheon or Theos, since he need to chose just one? For me my God's name and it is a proper name without any ambiquity is Allah! Deal with it. To be wating my time from Trinity, which was a our agreement to john Verse (which is like side show bob of the Simpson cartoon show fame), is a divertion tactics. I am sick of your game, either fish or cut bait. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Have You Praised Him Yet, Today? by olabowale(m): 2:38pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@Stimulus; What you called "unclaimable title" is a manifestation of what Muhammad gave you - a DENIAL of the revelations God gave of Himself to the Biblical prophets! That denial sealed his fate, qualified him as a false prophet, blinded the hearts and minds of those who followed him, and after over 14 centuries of knocking your heads on prayer mats, you still don't have a clue of redemption nor of what it means to know God as FATHER! Just as Muhammad confused it for "siring", that is how you have continued to miss the meaning!I thought your father is a Yoruba man. And so is your fathr's father. And so was your father's fathers' father? I thought the yoruba's are known as Omo Oduduwas? How well are you somebody's true child unless you are sired by him? I remember when my father died in 1966 {ra), I called my other men father. I remember one of my cousins who was about 20 plus years older than me, who was like a father to me. My father was his Uncle. My older brothers who were older than him, and he along with my maternal Uncles, etc did not mind me calling any of them father. But was any truly my father and could i claim a real sonship with any of them? The answer is no. Today my stepchildren call me dad and so are my neices and nephews and other people who i could have as children. Am I truly their father? The aswer is no. I like 4Him, as an example. My older son and him are practically in the same age. Could i claim him as my son? No. This is even a relationship between human beings. Now let me turn to the relationship between God and man: If you are truly Children of God, why does he severely punish you when you transgress against Him. And He has prepared the Hellfire for you? Is this the way you punish your son? No. So your claiming to be the child of God, is your own saying, only. God does not want His creation as children, nor does he accept that kinda relation from you. It will be a means of regret for you at the point of death, if you remain stedfast on that lie. Finally, I am grateful that i could wake up at Night and purify myself and supplicate to Him. I am not too proud to beg and there is no shame in crying or weeping either. Real men do cry. I am sure you don't. A heart as hard as a nail do not weep. Even when you lift up a stone after a rainfall, you will see that the soil that it sits on is wet. This is beyond your league. You will not get it now. Not yet, at least. Maybe tomorrow. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 2:15pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@Olowo tee: The word "trinity" is a term used to denote the Christian doctrine that God exists as a unity of three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each of the persons is distinct from the other, yet identical in essence. In other words, each is fully divine in nature, but each is not the totality of the other persons of the Trinity. Each has a will, loves, and says "I", and "You" when speaking. The Father is not the same person as the Son who is not the same person as the Holy Spirit who is not the same person as the Father. Each is divine, yet there are not three gods, but one God. There are three individual subsistences, or persons. The word "subsistence" means something that has a real existence. The word "person" denotes individuality and self awareness. The Trinity is three of these, though the latter term has become the dominant one used to describe the individual aspects of God known as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.So when according to you one of them died, did the death affect the ability of the others to enact His duties/power? We have realised that when the son died the father was capable to manage the affairs of overseeing the whole of creation and even forgave those he had forgiven, before the death of the son, and could even forgave others, regardless the death of the son. If the holy spirit also died, the remaining One could still be able to handle all the affairs as if nothing had happened. Not that it could happen, but just for clarity and a new way of looking at things, if the son had remained alive, as well as the holy ghost, but the One who was always the Speaker dies (again, I repeat not that it could ever happened (and I ask The Almighty God for His Forgiveness of my wrongs)), could the remaining two without Him capable of handling the affairs of all things; Angels, Jinns, Heavens and earth, all thing between and beyond them? I am clearly certain they could not. So you see Olowo Tee, the 2 that you are attaching to God the Almighty Creator are absolutely irrelevant to His existence. They are nothing more than His Creations, like everything else. To argue away that three entities all of a sudden becoming One Supreme Entity, is absurd and make no sense. Not just from me, it just does not make theological Sense: More Importantly, when Adam was Created and through out his and his wife's mistakes that followed, we only heard about God's interaction with them. The holy ghost and the son were no where to be found and absolutely irrelevant to any and all actions and decisions. All of a sudden you will spring the two who have been dormant all this time on us? Where was the son or the holy ghost when the sons of Adam and Eve were disagreeing and one killed the other? Where were they when Noah people were doing evil to the point they were wiped out by flood? Where were they when the people of Lut were committing evil deeds, etc? Sisi mi, I have respect for you in the good work you are doing, with kids in School. I am sure it is slanted towards you propagation of your religion. I am not sure we are talking about apples and oranges here. @Stimulus: Never will I patronise you. I do not enjoy anything about street people. You do your work and I do mine. I have no need for your type. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 1:25pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@Stimulus: Open your eyes and read the article from Wikipedia posted above: I also remarked, there that if the definition of Ton theon is wrong from Wikipedia, the same source for your 'Intelligence,' then your whole premise is wrng. Afterall, they are your first rate 'Greek reference source.' You see I do not have to have any problem knowing that in English God could mean anything if it has a small g, while with a capital G, it mean the Almighty Creator. Also Lord can be use to denote the superiority of one person by another, (afterall there is a house of lords in England parliamentary governance), but there is One true Lord, Lord God the Almighty Creator. And Jesus aint it. Please return to Mark 12 Verse 29. Thats Jesus talking directly, at least no Muslim will disagree with the textural meaning of that verse. Open your eyes and your mind and take every word in and then get back to me. I will devote the whole of this week for you for concerns. I may be busy next week, God (Almighty Creator) willing. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Have You Praised Him Yet, Today? by olabowale(m): 1:11pm On Feb 19, 2008 |
@The poster and others Christian: Why worship creation then, if God Almighty is different and apart from all created beings? Have you praised Him today?Alas! The Christian will never disappoint anybody. Everything must end with Jesus, even when they are trying to talk to God, directly. They never cease to call themselves children of god. Yet God the Almighty created the first man, Adam, and we are all Children of Adam, because we came from his loin/seed with Eve, his wife. But God never called Adam His son or Eve His daughter. And neither of the husband and wife called God father, how then we see Christian claim this unclaimable title, when God does not say that He wants Children, yet he has been consistent in saying that He is the Creator? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: John 1:1 - LOGOS and THEOS by olabowale(m): 1:29am On Feb 19, 2008 |
@Stimulus: First, I had to deal with Ahmed Deedat's false premises, because his articles and arguments have always been celebrated as "scholarly" - and no Muslim has exercised the dicipline to carefully examine whether or not Deedat was being honest to the facts on ground.Adulators; Muslims or christians? Its got to be the Christians! No wonder, there is no shame in your vocabulary. I guess you no christian told you that the core message of Muhammad was Laa ila ha ilallah. Only this was his objesctive for 13 years in Makka. Before I continue, I need to translate that to a language that you understand, your mother tongue, lest you accuse the Muslims of sticking to Arabic alone: Ko si oba to to sin afi Oba Oluwa nikon! Muhammad never stopped there, but the last 10 years after Makka, in Madina, Muhammad never stopped and he died on this principle. And for good indication of the iconoclastic quality of Islam towards idol worshipping, at conquest of makka, the only toppled, were the 360 Idols stockpiled into ka'aba. Then al Uzza was destroyed and the person who was behind it was killed. And the leasership of Makka was not replaced whereas we see that before then and after this conquest, every victory, always replaced the leadership of the vanquished people who they toppled. We see how the U. S. replaced saddam Hussein, upon victorious of the Iraqi Army. If all the Muslims foundamentally do worship One God whose proper name is Allah in Arabic, I wonder how you will explain or what will you call your christian religion but Idolatry, since you worship more than one god, but gods, who you claim were all there in existence before the beginning of creation? It is ironic that the action of Ibrahiim who destroyed all the gods of his people but putting the axe on the shoulder of the biggest and the only remaining god, though noble and just, kinda remind me of your claim that your small god was also killed, yet the world did not come to an end. Nothing happened upon this sudden death. You know what except that there was no death and he was not a real God. You see the Muslim god, which is One, does not die, never tired, and never fatigued. This is the different between between us, who serve a real God, unlike you who worship many gods. I guess in this case largeness in number does not mean truth. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 10:21pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@Stimulus: As usual, I know you will take the bait; GodfearersThe same place you go to get your information. If they are wrong, about ton theon, then definately you are wrong. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 10:14pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@Stimulus; You should realize yours is a mega-size, and I'll help you zip your molars long before you advise anyone else.As long as you are not violent with me. I still carry the whole 32; molars, premolars, canines and incisors. No cavity,Alhamdulillah. Because I am "afterall a Christian", therefore by default my arguements are tantamount to fraud? You're a waste! This is the kind of hypocrisy that I don't put up with - you learn how to be disrespectful towards others, but cannot endure your own ribald lingo. Well done.I guess my hypocricy has not stopped you from calling me all names in the book. But I would not mind if you concentrate on Trinity, here or in the thread opened on it. I will not let you divert our dialogue to another matter. Musa (same as Moses) referred to God as FATHER - how many times will you blidn yourself to that fact?If God 'made thee,' and yet still a father, how then He is not the Maker/Creator of Jesus? Whyat is different in the case of Jesus? Yet He made Adam, Noah and His friend Ibrahiim, is He also their father? Is father just a word of respect and closeness in respect to God and not meaning the father who sire? We have to realise that Moses father was under the bondage also in Egypt. Could this condition of Moses father be indicated that God was under bondage, and it was His son Moses who emancipated Him? Never. Oga, please show me where you found Hitler as a Christian. Just show me.You must be the only one on nairaland who never saw Adolf Hitler came out of the church, with regally dressed Church Priest/Preacher. Ask other people and they will direct you to the thread. I am sure the talians and Germans will be eager to know that a Nigerian called their once upon a time leader, non Christians, although bad Christians, but Christians anyhow. What makes a person a Christian is the belief in the Primary tenet of Christianity: believe in Jesus. And there is no doubt that Hitler and Mussollinni believed in Jesus. Muhammad hated Jews and Christians and cursed them until his last breath - this is a fact in your hadiths, and no sensible Muslim would deny that except you! Second fact is that his own curses returned upon him, and that is why you guys are perpetually infuriated to send fatwas all over the world at the slightest irrational idea that you can fathom!Please direct me to that Hadith, book and number. I got to verify it myself. You have started this silly rivalry again! Do you want a list of Muslims who have left Islam and become leading Christians today? Even on this forum where some lady opened a thread about whether there were any former Great Ones, I was surprised to find several others stand out clearly to attest to that. If you want to boast of numbers, go and weep and snivel on your mat - the Christians on nairaland far outnumber Muslims any day and any weather!I meant within the companionship of the prophet. You see every prophet, including Jesus had companions only from the people they belong to. Their own tribe, only. Except Muhammad who had companions without and outside his tribe. If you have any prophet who had any of this conditions of companionship, I will like to know. And you should name the companions. Afterall, Jesus himself did not preach to anyone outside the Children of Israel. When you make puerile arguements that you can't sustain, then you begin to cry about your old age!I have not cried, yet and i promise that I will not cry. Age is irrelevant here. Afterall you have called me all names in the book and I will manage to remain above the frails. I will not let my age be effective here. What happens to the Biblical verse which says salvation is of the Jews?If thats a fact as you said, am I not correct to say that the Jews turn god to a tribal possession? If I am wrong, then that verse in the Bible will be wrong along with me. If I am write, all your refuttal a you quoted from the Bible will be wrong. Either way, some part of the Bible will be wrong. You see where corruptions entered the Bible, now/ That salvation is of the Jews does not mean that salvation was meant ALONE for Jews! Through the Jews, salvation would come to the entire world - for it is through the Jewish nation that the Messiah would be born!Your own interpretation (Spin) of that Verse. Afterall, Jesus did not explain it to his companions. Remember they did not have the spiritual development/maturity to deal with complex matters in belief yet.? Afterall, they asked him to to give them a sign, the reason the three days and three night came about. Was the religion to be brought to the world through the messiah, Christianity then? I don't think so, since Jesus never mentioned it. Can you explicate why Muhammad tried to cheat everyone with a tribalistic deity that must be called 'Allah' to which everyone has to speak arabic because that deity understands no other language? Can you esxplain to me the rational behind why the Qur'an is no longer the word of Allah as soon as it is translated to another language? Can you explain what tribalistic rational excuses Muhammad's prejudice to make everyone bend to the arabic culture in order to please his 'allah'? And yet, you sidon there and start accusing the Jews with such hypocrisy. Go weep in the corner of your cubicle.Alhamdulillah, I do not have a cubical and if i weep, which is not out of possibility, will not be because you said so. Now back to your question; We will realise that Muhammad did not become wealthier after he became a prophet. Rather he became poor and in many instances he went to bed hungry. And at death, there was not too much property to share among his family. I wonder, it that was a deliberate attempt to cheat anyone, except he was ordered by a God that can not be refused. This should be enough as a response for you. Yet when I am in salah, I still speak the language of my birth, Yoruba language to make supplication. We've been through those issues before - and unless you're forcefully blind, you should have seen the needlessness of whipping it up here as an excuse in defence to fill space!You or whoever among you who attempted to explain it, did a terrible job and it is deemed unacceptable. No Christian around the world have been able to explain it to even satisfy his own querries about. Less trying to satisfy the Muslims, who know better and stand strictly and unwaivering on that singular Truth. In the same way, Muhammad referred to the Jews as pigs - and Muslims in the Middle East have textbooks for school children having such appellations to the Jews. What do you make of these reports -Allah says in His book that he turned the disobedient Children of Israel to Pig and some to Ape as a means of their punishment. And we also read that in the Bible that after the golden calf incident, some people from the tribes of the children of Israel were killed out. Whats your point really? Is that you mewling excuse for the fact that you were confused about the meaning of the term 'Christian'?I get it. Anything goes. Just like Trinity. It is not there but it is acceptable in concept. But should there not be a reason known to develop a concept, in your case the missing trinity? No, you have never abused anybody - not even in the reply you posted above? I've put up with your penchant for the ridiculous for long - but there ought to be a time when you will swallow your own syrup.Facts please and nothing but the facts. Stop hooting for him - unless you're trying to show how dense both of you are! Intellectuals don't humour the public with illiterate posts and plagiarized articles, so what's all this nonsense about therationa all of a sudden? What has he said or argued that made any sense anywhere in his duplicated posts?Those who claim scholarship are often the ones who lack any. Olabowale, I'm not a kid. If you are going to be sane and safe, simply show the respect you desire others to accord you. Just one rascally adventure of the mundane from you, and you will regret ever engaging me on Nairaland!I thought we are on that course, already. The collision of you the mega tanker, versus me a simple trawler. I wonder how you will make my condition insane and unsafe? But that is beside the point. I want us to engage each other in that Trinity deal and i will not yield an inche from this discussion. I will hope that you will not disappoint your christian audience on nairaland and possibly around the world. I am urging from my heart. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 8:51pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@KAG: Unfortunately, all you are good for, and i am assuming that you can not support your argument with some explanation is a one line responses and questions. It is however good and comforting to know that you are not disputing the existence of God, but in your own word and in the foodstep of your mentor, Hawkins, you are only arguing that god may not be necessary. Do I understand your positioning of God correctly, then? If this is the case, then I will pay less attention to you and talk to the trinity guy. I am assuming that one should be on topic, and not straying too far from it. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 5:24pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@KAG; The eminent biblical scholar, Stimulus have engaged me, and this is the reason i have not had anytime to respond to you. I find him boring and his ignorance borders on juvenile pranks; I expected that from him, though. However i am not in the business of mutual admiration society, but of course, it does mean that I will be dishonest in my responses. But I want us to focus on the subject, since I do not see our dialogue as social clubbing: I used evolution in the context of the English term - that is, change and development - not in its biological sense - that is, change in allele frequencies of population. Hence, the concept of gods seem to have evolved from their primal stages.Could you tell us if there was a time in the history of human kind that the word evolution was not even in the vocabulary and was not used? Or prior to its existence in human vocabulary, it was used, like your Virtual Particle or the Particle in the Big Bang? The reason am asking these questions is to know how advanced was mankind before they knew that they evolved; thats based on your evolutionist concept now. An we find that most of those people are Christians that have a foundation in English. I have yet to hear a Chinese-speaking Buddhist say "Oh God, etc."I thought you would fair better than Stimulus. But I guessed I overrated you. Oh my God in Yoruba language is Olorun mi o. Every one have a rough interpretation of Oh my God in their language. You must never forget that English is a very young language and their are many more languages of the world older than it. W are in a medium where we all agree without saying it to communicate in English, and since i do not know what your mother tongue is, and you reside in England, it is a safe bet to assume that you speak and understand English. Please dont disappoint me with a simple mind thinking mentality. And you do not know Buddhists then, neither do you know Chinese, or any non Christian. Christianity does not have exclusivity on God, in thye English speaking countries of the world. Nor the English speaking people have any exclusivity to identify the Creator by name (considering that they all accept that their is one. Yet you who is pretending to disbelieve in His existence, will in crucial situation will remember God in a heart beat: Afterall, thats how Cat Steven wondered into the world of Islamic monotheism). No, the Big Bang theory is not the same as the conception of virtual particles. I used virtual particles to refute the argument that claims something can't come from nothing. Virtual particles indicated something different from the premise of the argument. It holds water, but of course you wouldn't know that.I wonder if you believe that something can come out of nothing, did the Big bang particle came out of nothing too, without anything that broughtit? And which came first, the Big bang Particle or the Virtual particle? It will seem to me that the Virtual particle came first from nothing to the space which was a vacuum. If its the Big bang Particle, then we can assume that there are series, at least two times we have a Virtual particle occurences. And why has there not been another and even why has not been another Big bang? If you can not find a logical explanation to any of this, i wonder if all was not a fluke? Finally, how did the space that the Big bang particle and the subsequent (Unbelievable is the process that something so small that it has not weight and no size could become this collossal and collage of things that we have today, both known and unknown!), and the Virtual particle occupied and came into existence in, respectively came about? There must be a dimension to the space, even though a vaccum before. What I am saying is that there must be something which your HYPOTHESIS can not explain, is behid it all. [1] If you were wondering which came first, then you were indeed lying in your statement above. Contrary to what you claimed, you weren't being sarcastic. In any case, the Big Bang occured before the incidence of virtual particles in our Universe.What brought about the Particle that was under the cation of the Big Bang (Force)? re you saying here that the Big bang is imperfect and can not bring about the metomorphosis of all thing and it needed Virtual particle(s), prior to the Virtual Particle coming to place? If this is so, then what role has virual particle participated in the evolution/metamorphosis of things? If your answer is no, and that the Big bang particle is the one involved in evolution of things (I am using metamorphosis and evolution to mean the same thing; afterall the butterfly and its pupae do not look alike), I want to know what active role or in active role Virtual particle is playing? If none, then it seems that it is irrelevant for it to even occur, since everything has its usefulness, what will be the usefulness of an perceive particle? [2] Yes virtual particles particles emerge in vacuums. Space is linked with inflation. There was no Space before the occurance of space. In fact, the question makes no sense.But you are trying to answer it. But because it geared you to consciousness, and a realisation that evolution is a fluke, all of a sudden the question does not make sense to you. However since you brought about inflation of space, I wonder if you know what made the space in flated? Afterall, inflation can only take place if there are differences in internal and external pressures: Yet all of these must be explained before you will be given a reprieve: So please explain how inflation came about before it helps the expansion of the space fom nothingness? [3]There was no particle that inflated, a singularity did (or to put it in your terminology, a singularity "banged"Nonsense! You have said nothing to go to the core of the matter. More hypothesis that will in time be defeaed. Yet their real reason was not to disprove the existence of God, but only an explanation, according to their scientific discoveries. But you will have to latch on to it to explain away your lack of undestanding of and acceptance of Creation. I wonder when we will see you evolve into a Monkey or something other than what you are, presently (I am not sure what you are since I have provide an opinion that you may be a machine, or something other than human). [7] I didn't see any gods there or here, either. I don't see any evidence to support a god being behind it all, let alone your god.When all fail, be defensive. I see your problem. However, when you dig deep enough, like layers of Onion, you will find the Core: GOD ALMIGHTY. Oh, you're right, it's Mohammedanism. I spelt it with an "i" that shouldn't have been there.You truly prove to me your Western oriental value: The muslims are known only as Muslims, and there is no derivitive name that is bearing Muhammad, , none! stimulus (m) |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 4:04pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@Stimulus: I have to go to Wikipedia, the same darn place you went, while you were pretending to be a Greek language expert. You can see how tontheon is explained. Yet none of the writer is a Muslim. yet any interpretation is possible. So theos could be anything; from physical idol, to conceptualised one and indeed even a person and finally God Almighty Creator Himself. Alhamdulillah, I do not have the same problem in Islam. God Almighty is known and accepted and we have no problem accepting Him as One whole. Godfearers From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Part of a series on The Bible Biblical canon and books Tanakh: Torah · Nevi'im · Ketuvim Old Testament · Hebrew Bible · New Testament · New Covenant · Deuterocanon · Antilegomena · Chapters and verses Apocrypha: Jewish · OT · NT Development and authorship Jewish Canon · Old Testament canon · New Testament canon · Mosaic authorship · Pauline epistles · Johannine works Translations and manuscripts Septuagint · Samaritan Pentateuch · Dead Sea scrolls · Targums · Peshitta · Vetus Latina · Vulgate · Masoretic text · Gothic Bible · Luther Bible · English Bibles Biblical studies Dating the Bible · Biblical criticism · Historical criticism · Textual criticism · Novum Testamentum Graece · NT textual categories · Documentary hypothesis · Synoptic problem · The Bible and history · Biblical archaeology Interpretation Hermeneutics · Pesher · Midrash · Pardes · Allegorical · Literalism · Prophecy Views Inerrancy · Infallibility · Criticism · Islamic · Qur'anic · Gnostic · Judaism and Christianity · Law in Christianity This box: view • talk • edit This article does not cite any references or sources. (January 2008) Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.(January 2008) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (March 2007) This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. WikiProject Religion or the Religion Portal may be able to help recruit one. If a more appropriate WikiProject or portal exists, please adjust this template accordingly. The Godfearers or Sebioi from Greek σεβεοι (Arabic: Sabi'een/Sabi'oon, Hebrew: Toshavim) are messianic Non-Jews who from the earliest of times have worshiped The Name of the Hebrew Elohim. Their original base was around Harran and they are of two types: Those (called Sabiah Hunafa in Arabic) who worship God Alone saying there is no god but Ton Theon, and those (called Sabiah Mushrikun in Arabic) who worship partners alongside Ton Theon. Abram is upheld as the perfect example among those who say there is no god but Ton Theon. In the New Testament Period other "'God-Fearers'" (φοβουμενοι τον θεον) were members of the gentile community who affiliated themselves to some degree with Jewish worship, who were interested in Jewish morality and monotheism, yet are not in obedience to some aspects of the Jewish Law (often circumcision) as a "'proselyte'" would be. Further, a God-fearer may still be involved with activities from paganism. The spectrum of ‘God-fearers’ would traverse between polytheistic paganism and proselyte-Judaism. The following is taken with permission from a blog entry on the topic written by Timothy Gough. Contents [hide] 1 Biblical evidence 2 Evidence from Acts 3 Extra-biblical evidence 4 Remarks 5 References 6 Texts 7 See also 8 External links [edit] Biblical evidence The difficulty in finding passages which mention ‘God-fearers’ is one of terminology. Luke in his two volume narrative gives us at least five terms (φοβουμενοι τον θεον (Acts 10:1-2; 10:22; 13:16; 13:26), σεβομενοι τον θεον (Acts 13:50; 16:14; 18:6-7), σεβομενοι προσηλυτοι (13:43), σεβομενοι Έλληνες (17:17)). It’s my belief however, that they are one and the same people and that we can find peoples, not necessarily under the name ‘God-fearers,’ who can be categorised as God-fearers. Because of terminological issues, some believe that ‘God-fearers’ are ‘pious’ or ‘devout’ Jews. It’s my aim through examining the texts, to show why this is an incorrect understanding. Some from this will give them too vague a description; others would go to the other extreme and over-institutionalise them. Throughout the Old-Testament we see ‘God-fearer’ types; 'strangers who dwell with you.' These dwelt with the Israelites and were given some basic laws to follow. Such as in Leviticus 17:12-13, Therefore I have said to the people of Israel, No person among you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger who sojourns among you eat blood. The Gospels give no explicit mentions of ‘God-fearers’ however there are places we might infer this, the most obvious is John 12:20ff The Greeks were not Jews as they were among Jews. They’re still known by their Hellenistic name and they were worshipping at a Jewish feast, so could be God-fearers. But what makes this more likely is by cross-referencing this with Acts 17:4,12 The Greeks in Thessalonica and Berea are God-fearers, making it likely that the Greeks at Jerusalem were also God-fearers. John Dominic Crossan believes that Paul in his epistles was writing to God-fearers. Paul writes to Churches he founded, comprising many God-fearers. We also know that the Jews placed a lot of emphasis on the God-fearers , which might explain the constant difficulty with Judaizers trying to bring converts under the Law, and possibly the synagogues. God-fearers would be taught in the synagogues that circumcision was the way into the covenant, yet Paul taught it by faith alone. (Which was, by its very nature, more attractive to God-fearers who were suspicious of commitment to the Law.) This seems to be the specific debate in Galatians 2:16ff It could be that Paul, when dealing with the Jewish law was addressing God-fearers who were susceptible to the Jewish mission to keep God-fearers in their circles. [edit] Evidence from Acts Within Acts we see the most explicit reference to God-fearers (Acts 10; 13:16; 13:26; 13:43; 13:50; 16:14; 17:4; 17:17; 18:6-7). Some say this is Luke writing as a theologian who needed God-fearers for his narrative. I believe the reason we have the most references to God-fearers within Acts is because it gives us historical details not necessary in the rest of the New-Testament narratives. God Fearers in Acts depends much on the geography and situation in question (The references to God-fearers cover a large area, including Caesarea, Pisidian Antioch, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens and Corinth). God-fearers are mentioned several times in Acts, sometimes they heartily welcome the gospel, whereas at other times they begin the persecution. Acts 10 Cornelius the Centurion is a ‘model God-fearer,’ with almsgiving, prayer (v.2) and a good reputation among Jews (v.22). Therefore, ‘he had some preparation for the Gospel he was soon to hear.’ He was not a Jew/proselyte (shown by the Jewish Christians who came with Peter who were amazed by the fact he had received the Holy Spirit). Furthermore, he was a Roman Centurion who would be expected to participate in the imperial-cult. ‘Because of his official duties and despite his beliefs in one God, has to demonstrate publicly his polytheism.’ Cornelius was not the first Gentile convert (See Acts  , however from him the mission to the Gentiles began (Acts. 11:1), his household also becomes a Christian base as his entire household were filled with the Spirit and baptised.Acts 13:16-50 Here Paul is in Pisidian Antioch, and as was his custom he goes first to the synagogue where Jews and God-fearers responded. This ‘is the first time the mission to the Gentiles is proclaimed as a recognized aim.’ This is also the first step of persecution. Prominent women drove Paul and Barnabas out from their borders. These women are unlikely to be Jewish as it is unlikely that they possessed a higher status than the males or that they initiated the persecution before the males. They are very likely God-fearers, which makes sense when cross-referenced later in Luke’s narrative (Acts 17:4, 17). From these passages we see the beginnings of the Gentile mission, which posed a serious problem for the Jews as their status quo was suddenly challenged. The Jews generally had better success because of the long relationship they had enjoyed with God-fearers, owing to the hostility to the Gospel in Ch13. This is an important development in the spread of the Gospel and the accompanying persecution, which as we see here and throughout Acts, God-fearers play an important role in this. Acts 16:14 This passage is crucial in understanding the success of the Gospel. Paul goes to a ‘place of prayer,’ presumably the area didn’t have a synagogue and meets Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth. This makes Lydia an extremely wealthy member of the community, and she is at the meeting; a God-fearer (v.14). This makes a base for Christians to meet in Philippi, the household of a God-fearer provides a huge resource for the spread of the Gospel. Acts 17:4,17 Again Paul’s begins in the synagogue and God-fearers who are there respond. Here they are called ‘worshipping (σεβομενων) Greeks’ with prominent women. And again this leads to an uproar from the Jews and Paul and Silas are accused of ‘turning the world upside-down,’ which, for the Jews, by evangelising God-fearers, that is exactly what they are doing. This happens again after God-fearers respond in v12 and again in v17 the same way. Acts 18:6-7 Much the same way as Lydia, prominent God-fearer; Titus Justus is converted with his whole household next door to the synagogue providing a base for the Gospel and a back door into the synagogue, as we see Crispus, the leader of the synagogue is converted. These passages in Acts teach us not only of the persecution that follows the mission to the God-fearers but also of the God-fearers necessity to the Gospel’s spread, particularly the resources of Lydia and Titus. This gives us much insight into the nature of Paul’s missionary techniques in reaching the Gentiles, via Judaism and the sovereign plan of God. • The Gentile mission was began and was made public through God-fearers • The mission to the God-fearers was drenched with Jewish Persecution • This persecution was sometimes started by the Jewish-faithful God-fearers • The spread of the Gentile mission was made possible by the resources of God-fearers [edit] Extra-biblical evidence ‘It's important to remember that archaeology by its very nature is not able to produce a complete picture of cultural and religious life…Only the combination of the information received from the different sources, and the careful cross-checking of them, can produce reliable results’.[1] Inscriptions have been found around the Diaspora, which include the word θεοσεβης, many of these are identities. The most important, the ‘Aphrodisias’ inscription, contains lists of synagogue people. What’s interesting is the God-fearers are separate; making them different from the Jews, yet still members of the synagogue. Some of the inscriptions appear to give the title God-fearer’ to a Jew however the evidence to support this is minimal. Kraabel ‘suggests that the inscription from Aphrodisias refers simply to pious Gentiles who contributed to synagogues.’ This again doesn’t fit the evidence. ‘The Cult of the Most High God’ (ϋψιστος). Many believe that ϋψιστος is simply a name given to many pagan-deities. Trebilco argues that in Acts16:16-18, the girl was talking about a pagan-god, not the true God. However, ϋψιστος implies monotheism and its Jewish use is overwhelming, Jews addressed God as Theos Hypsistos (LXX). Acts 16, θεου του ύψιστου, when cross-referenced with the sayings of the demons in Marks Gospel, is the Jewish God, not Pagan. Its likely ϋψιστος is a mergence of Jewish and Pagan beliefs where some Gentiles would be a part of, a group of people within the pagan/proselyte spectrum: God-fearers. Jewish Historian, Josephus also mentions persons attached to synagogues: ‘[Jews] were constantly attracting to their religious ceremonies multitudes of Greeks, and these they had in some measure incorporated with themselves.’ ‘But no one need wonder that there was so much wealth in our temple, for all the Jews throughout the habitable world, and fearers of God…had been contributing, ’ I therefore believe that we can legitimately speak of ‘God-fearers’ as a category of people in the first century AD. [edit] Remarks God-fearers covers a spectrum of Gentile-sympathizers who were attracted to Judaism, mainly for its morality and monotheism but were not willing to become a proselyte, who would be circumcised, would attend Jewish feasts, would have made a public statement of faith and for all intents and purposes were considered in the covenant. God-fearer faith is more of a pick-and-choose faith in that it is merged paganism with Judaism. For instance, Cornelius, being a centurion was probably a member of the imperial-cult. Some God-Fearers may have been more institutionalised, for instance the Aphrodisias inscription includes them as an official group of people, and traces of ‘rules’ can be found. However, these wouldn’t cover the whole spectrum of who God-Fearers were. God-Fearers were invaluable to Judaism for two reasons: First, among God-Fearers were some very prominent members of the community who were encouraged to give financially and ‘have for a long time.’ Second, Judaism is an anti-Roman oppression religion. Jews stand against idolatry, polytheism, therefore against the imperial-cult, and worship one God who would free them. Some Jews believed that God would use men directly and stood in open hostility to Rome, see also zealots. Therefore, its my belief that God-fearers would act as a lens for Rome to view Judaism; members of the community who expressed a healthy interest in Judaism, but were not fanatical or anti-Rome. When the Gospel spread to the God-Fearers, not only was financial aid redirected from the synagogues to the Churches, but the lens was being removed from Judaism, leaving it more exposed. -- In many ways the God-fearers were ideally ‘suited’ for the Gospel, being attracted by Jewish monotheism but not liking all the law. The Gospel Paul preached was justification by faith alone, and not by the law, so; ‘the Jews have been telling you that you’re not saved unless you’re circumcised and I’m telling you’re that your saved through believing in Jesus and not by the bondage of the law.’ ‘It was as natural for God-fearing Gentiles to embrace the blessings of the Gospel…as it was for the Jews to decline them.’ Geographically, in Pisidian Antioch, God-fearers greatly responded yet this was seemingly where God-fearers were most attached to the Jews, starting the persecution. In Philippi and Corinth, prominent God-fearers were converted allowing churches to be established. In Berea and Thessalonica, many God-fearers responded but possibly with the greatest hostility. The significance of ‘God-fearers’ in the book of Acts is that they served as a dominant people for Paul to bring the Gospel to, being naturally affiliated with the Jews allowing sometimes a backdoor. They had a natural ideology that fit the gospel message, they sometimes provided rich resources and they redirected attention from Judaism. This makes them imperative in the spread of the Gospel and shows the sovereignty of God at work through the apostolic era. The God fearers were a legitimate people and we all too often minimalise their importance in the early church. [edit] References |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 3:51pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
I wonder how you, Stimulus, will explain Theos; any deity, including God. Yet TonTheon is described as God fearer and Ibrahiim (as) as Islamic Hanifan is used to illustrate it. Further the Jews in the time of Paul preached that to be God fearer, the Greek will have to be circumcised, to be in the covenant and worship with them in the Synagogue, while Paul (the pseudo apostle who never met Jesus and Jesus never met him), turn the process of standard belief with the Jews which was even accepted to Jesus over its head, by saying circumcision is not necessary anymore to be in the covenant, but just by faith alone. This shows that some part of Moses laws were scrapped by Paul, when Jesus himself had a different take to it. HOW CAN YOPU EXPLAIN THE BETTER BETWEEN JESUS AND PAUL? Which person would you take his position, if they have different andopposing positions? It is either that you have to abandone the whole falsehood or you remain and wallow in your falsehood. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: John 1:1 - LOGOS and THEOS by olabowale(m): 2:50pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@Stimulus: In the first instance, all worshippers believe that their god is truly God. I remember my youth in Yorubaland of Nigeria, seeing the Onisongos go through their rituals; the dances and the offerings and the kneeling down, etc. They too, believe in God and through their songo, the lesser god thought that they are sincere worshippers. This is the case with you as a Christian. Your premise that Sheikh Ahmed Deedat did not know what the proper word for God the Creator is and what any god, that a person deitifies is, in Greek is foolish to say it mildly. And my reason is this; Unlike your blind assumptions and your lack of ability to be civil and direct in argument, are you aware that there are Greeks in Greece and in other parts of the world who are Muslims? (And you aught to have known that I meant to write that I am not a Greek in the Trinity Thread, except that your Childish, almost juvenile street quality of thinking will not allow you to be objective). Here in America, and indeed New York City; the jews hae a saying and it indicates in a general sense of their belief and insincerity in that belief: "In God we Trust, and the rest is cash!" What it does proof is that they also worship Currency, as the song goes, "almighty dollar!" So your actually saying that theos truly mean God the Almighty Creator, just as TonTheon is ridiculous. Reasons are these; The most glearing is that while you are trying so hard to put Jesus in place before creation and assumed that he was the word that was with God Almighty, you have ignorantly not examined and take into consideration that three is not two in your attempt to prove Trinity. First, in that verse of John 1 Verse 1, nothing indicated that Spirit and word were with God (as entity that were also God). Second, the verse clearly indicated that God is singular, which is consistent with Old testament understanding of God. It also confirmed what Jesus himself said in Verse 29 of Mark 12. Third, we observe that that verse John1 Verse 1 was written after Jesus was lifted up, hence he could not rebuke the writer and all who wanted to equate him with God and deitified him. Afterall, we see how contradictory is Mark 12 Verse 29 is to John 1 Verse 1, if one were to assume that Jesus was there as the "word" in John 1 vertse 1. However, if one will take the true opinion in understanding that God Almighty Creator speaks audibly and His voice could be heard, (afterall He spoke to Moses, first in the burning bush and in many other places and several other prophets (as), before and after Moses, and gave his commands to the Angels (as)), the verse will agree with each other. A honest man will not give us the song and dance as you did, by discarding the OT and the usage of the words and god, gods and God in them, and relate all of that to the time of Jesus and post Jesus in the Bible. One will clearly see that god is used loosely not only to indicate God Almighty, but even humans and inanimate objects. If dishonesty is what you stand on, good for you. But you must never forget that as a Muslim, the Qur'an by Allah has informed us that your book; Bible both the old and new testaments are corrupt, already corrupted by the hands of scholars and writers among you. From the old day and even in recent times, a period that is less that 60 years; circa 1952 or so compared to 1970 or so! To now invite me to switch from Trinity, a word that does not appear in your Bible, though clumsily an idea is developed to paint a mural of it is like me describing a beautiful person, but never gave a gender to indicate, whether she is a woman and i want everybody to assume is my woman folk; my mother or my wife or my sister or my aunt or my niece or my cousin. I did not say my grandmothers because they are both dead (ra). Whereas, in the Bible we have the word comforter to describe an entity that will come after Jesus. And in the Qur'an, we see in Surah Saff (verse 6), that Allah says that Jesus role included announcing the coming of Ahmad (a name belonging to Muhammad (as), and it means the one who comfort; try the arabic for size). Unfortunately, you have forgotten that Islam by Qur'an says that allah is the proper name of God, and in many translations of what it means, the translators in those languages often give a disclaimer that these translations are not the "Qur'an" and yet some preserve the name "Allah" to denote God Almighty Creator as much as they can. I wonder how you will handle the day of judgement when you realise that Jesus was never more than a command of God, his Creator? And when i say the day of judgement, it actually starts from the time when the soul/Spirit (they mean the thing that makes the body alive, they are not two things, contrary to your misunderstanding. (thanks to M_Nwanko)). Jesus will have no ability to support you and actually will deny you on that day! |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Don't Replace The Word "A.L.L.A.H" With God, They Are Not The Same by olabowale(m): 1:19pm On Feb 18, 2008 |
@Dafidixone: The Ibrahiimic God is not the same as Christian gods: I will not know which one of your three Christian gods that you will equate or call the God of Ibrahiim? Is it the Son god? Or holy ghost god? Or father god? In each of the three, none was referred to as God by Ibrahiim, the hanifan. You Christians put your own spin on the name or title "God" and think it means anything. No, my man, you and the Christians, in all those generations and till the end of time, who believed Jesus to be a diety and also that holy ghost is a diety and then call your Creator father, and finally rejecting the final prophet of God, the only one to all mankind and therefore, not being from the religion of Islam (Islam is from Silmi and Salaam), you have nothing to dowith Ibrahiim and his concept of God; the Only Deity worthy of all and every worship. I can say the same about the Children of Israel who now call themselves Jews. (How can a less noble clan absorb a greater one: The Yusuf clam who was a prophet, his clan was absorb by Judah's clan. Afterall, Judah and all his brothers and parents prostrated their faces to Yusuf, in Egypt!). The Jews turned their god to a clanish God. It is as if they are the only one who have a hold on God and the rest of us have no relationship with God, the Almighty Creator. fterall their is none that Created except Him alone. The Jews makes their tribe the only tribe that has exclusivity on God. I should know their opinions: I have many associates among them. Their relation with God and always questioning His authority, wisdom and blaming Him if anything happens to them show the lack of true believe in Him. Unlike the Muslims who in the Qur'an are warned not to behave like the generations that have passes (The people who had earlier revelations; Jews and Christias are examples here). Islam is a religion that requires a complete belief and submission, while still having a complete human quality and dignity. For example, one is encouraged to eat first before prayer if hungry and the food is already set, but the time for salah is in. Further one is encouraged to walk in good measured paces, but not run to join the Salah prayer, even though it is in process. Your intention is very important here and one is to be in complete calm when entered Salah, which will not be the case, if you had raced to it. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 12:26am On Feb 18, 2008 |
@Stimulus: Your response #1:I think you are to juvenile to be taken serious. My answer is there for everybody to see, but I was correcting your Bible, especially, when John 1;1 is translated directly, word for word to English. Now we will actually see the 'Olodo rabata,' between you and Me (I do not use I here for obvious reason). Quote from: olabowale on Today at 09:13:40 PMDid you see where I suggested that O Theos or Ton Theon was a proper and better word that what your Greek Bible put, which could have meant any diety, including david Kuresh of the branch Davidian of Weco Texas fame? My questions #3:The first premise here is that the Bible, in general, be it in any language, including Greek is corrupted. And I am a greek and I do not care too much for it as a language. I have too many greek blooded people in my life to defer to a Yoruba man as a greek Tutor. I do not read Yoruba translation of the Qur'an and it will be useless to go for a Greek translation with you. I speak English, and I am not in a greek speaking society and the benefit to me is not significant, so why would I want to discuss Qur'an in Greek with you? I can see that you want to deflect the issue of the Trinity. But I will not make it easy for you. You gotta stay on it. And I left your confusion intact above to show your instability. I have already answered #2 and there is no reason to label #3 as #2, again. I'll read the texts in the languages in which they were given. Where we find them in Greek, then Greek it shall be; where it is Hebrew, I'll post them in Hebrew; and then Aramaic also will be in Aramaic.If you want us to use Greek Bible, stay with it. that is the call. You can not change Bible. Unless you are saying that you are not certain of 'a Bible.' Just exactly what the muslims have been saying; You ain't got nothing. So chose your poison. Unless you wanna be the Snake oil sales man, but will not work with me. That is how to be consistent and not try to bend another man's language to the peghole of Arabic or any other lanaguage.So how many languages do you need to discuss TRINITY with me? Three Languages and English? Your problem is that you're too scared to stand out honestly enough to accommodate the texts as they appear in their languages. Is it not remarkable that Deedat was making so much noise about the Greek texts of John 1:1 - why should we then acquiesce to your boohoos here about not going to Greek or any other language of the texts?So if you have gulls enough as a Christian stay with Greek Bible and i will cream you with your own Bible! If you're not prepared well enough to discuss this issue, take a break and go and prepare soundly. I don't intend to be as condescending as you're hoping of me - and when I start, nothing will be left untouched that needs to be examined in all the core issues of Deedat's arguments which babs787 has plagiarized gleefully.I will meet you in measures; foot length by foot length and arm length by arm length. Don't think too much of yourself. Empty barrels make the loudest noise. I will stand toe to toe with you and God willing, I will deck you on your "Bible." Below, Stimulus is John 1 Verse 1 in Greek (In a word for word translation in English). Of course, you do not have an opportunity to ever seen the Aramaic or hebrew Bible before. That will not interest you, except that you settle for a second run. The verse (John 1:1) in its original Greek Contex is written as this: εν (at) αρχη (first) ην (is/was) ο (the) λογος (reason/intellect) και (and) ο (the) λογος (reason/intellect) ην (is/was) προς (towards/facing/with) τον (the) θεον (god) και (and) θεος (god) ην (is/was) ο (the) λογος (reason/intellect) so once we translate the whole verse we're basically seeing: At first is/was the reason/intellect and the reason/intellect is/was towards/facing/with God (ton theon) and god is the reason/intellect. The problem with that verse in Greek is that we see theos being written as just theos (god/diety) and not as o theos or ton theon, which are proper ways of saying God (or the god = al ilah = Allah). So the part which is written solely on its own as "theos", could be implying just any random diety, of course with ton theon written before in the sentence we automatically assume that we're still talking about the same God. Over all though, logos does not mean word in ancient Greek, and the translation of logos to word is a corrupt modern translation of the meaning for word. Funny thing is the Greek word for Dictionary is Lexilogio, which is a combination of two words Lexi (word) and logio (logos = reason/intellect) so you can't say that lexilogio means wordword, it must means word-intellect, and the purpose of a dictionary is for the knowledge of words. The ironic thing is though, St John of Damascus who apparently had a high position during one of the Khalifa's reign during 747(?) is that he translated the Arabic word for Word from Quran's verses as 3:45 and 4:171 as Logos into the Greek. Strangely enough though, he was a scholar of Christianity whose opinion of Islam was that Islam was a heretic form of Christianity and as we all know that's incorrect and not what the Quran refers to itself, for it does not call itself Christianity. He was probably the earliest critic of Islam, of course who knows how this man was allowed to function as he did while working for the Khalif. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 10:55pm On Feb 17, 2008 |
@Stimulus: You have such a Big Mouth. And you need to learn when it is not necessary to open it. My proipblem with you is not your dishonesty. You are entitled to your own amount of fraud: Afterall you are a Christian. My propblem is that you are not ashamed of any of your absurd statement: Which of the Prophets before Christianity referred to God as Father? (Adam, Noah, Ibrahiim, Isiaq, Yaquub, Yusuf, Musa, Daud,Sulaiman, Eliyas, Yunusa, yahya, Zakariyyah, etc?). Name one? And am sure you will deny that Hitler was not a Christian. You shameless thing. (I have to tone down my voice). The Germans will be happy to hear that an African denied their Christianity. If prophet Muhammad hated the Jews so much how did Abdasalaam accepted Islam, along with so many Jewish clan men? How did we have so many Jews converting today? I have friends among them, so be careful about your falsifications. As to the Christians, that was no brainer: Salma Al Farsi and others were Christians before the converted. And of course have you ever heard of Al nagash, the king of Ethiopia? Little do you know. What happens to the Biblical verse which says salvation is of the Jews? Could you put that in contest of Non tribal and let me see how you can make that fit? Or try the New Testament verse where Jesus was reported to say that he was not sent but only to the lost house of Israel and other similar verses, which prohibited him from preaching to other people and evn referred to them as "dogs?" I wonder where Gentile, a derogative word to describe non Jews came about, except to emphasis the tribal differencs? Matt 15 verse 26: It is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dog, sound very much Tribalistic to me. So Jesus did not fit in the christian mode? Did he instruct anybody to start a religion after him? I doubt if you know the diffrerence between Children of Israel and Jews? Moses was not a Jew by religion, and I am not sure if he was a tribal Jew, either. Now lets deal with trinity and let me see what you got. I will try to wear Elephant type Thick skin. I will ignore your abuses. It is very typical of you. Remember what I said about Therationa? This is the exact thing I am seeing you do here with me. I will take it as long as I can and then I may just refuse it any time, that I think you are taking me for granted and blatantly disrespecting me. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 9:36pm On Feb 17, 2008 |
@Stimulus: Its your show. Am helping you to run it. You want answers, I will give you plenty. I will not behave like you who will just come up with a mundane one liner, and yet not saying much with it. Lets stay on topic. Lets go to TRINITY. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 9:33pm On Feb 17, 2008 |
@Stimulus; @babs787,I answered your three 'special' questions in Trinity. Please lets get to it. I don't you to cop out now. Even though i could have given you many answers, but I will defer my opinions till your respond at the TRINITY Thread> I am wondering how you are going to defend TRINITY, a foreign word in the Bible by digging up 'Ideas' and i hope you will be gullible enough to use John 1;1 to garnish the 'idea!' |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 9:16pm On Feb 17, 2008 |
@Stimulus: Let me me kill your enthusiasm before it began. If you wanna deal with me be consistent. You wanna use Greek, use Greek and stay with it. Don't run from Pillar to post with me, by switching to Hebrew or Aramaic whenever you hit a brickwall in your Greek. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Trinity by olabowale(m): 9:13pm On Feb 17, 2008 |
@Stimulus: @babs787,(a) Theos, but it shout be O Theos or Ton theon, which should have referred to "God" in a better way. (b) Ton Theon is "God" in a proper sense. (c) Theos is any deity: For example Ogun, Shango, Makumba, Yamaya, Obatala, (Whats my girls +Osisi Igbo traditional deities' names). Now that I have answered your 'special questions,' what now? Where is the beef? |
| Christianity Etc › Re: Call To Xtians And Muslims Against Therationa by olabowale(m): 6:31pm On Feb 17, 2008 |
@Stimulus: In that case, Muhammad was wrong - and it does not matter whether he said it in the Hadith or the Qur'an!Naive soul you are. You made a statement without given any reason (cogent or not) for it and not even an effort to support your off-the-wall statement. Let me show you something: When the Muslims talk about your 3 god pesons in 1 god, we use your Bible first, to argue our case against you. Take the case of mark 12 Verse 29, which everyone of you have been avoiding to deal with. This Bible verse is attributed to Jesus and all the Christians the world over accept it. But that verse speaks directly that God and Lord is refering to the God of Jesus who is also the God of the people following Jesus. This is how to argue and not the evasive mumbo jumbo that you slapped together. I am niot interested in any ying yang. Come correctly or not at all. Why must everything that Muhammad said be pitted against Christianity and Judaism? If Christians and Jews were the greatest concerns of the Quraish prophet, then it stands to reason that something was seriously wrong with his theology or belief system. Not to mention his irrational hatred for believers in the revelations of God in the Bible.The preaching against disbeliefs covers in addition to Jews, and Christians, the direct Idol worshippers: Hindus, etc and the non believers of anything Atheists and Agnostics. However true belief is not what Christians have. Afterall, your god is 3 god personalities. How can that be true god, when one of them dies off and yet that death is so erronous in concept, but it can't guarantee what you guys claim its purposed to do! Let me help you under your Bible properly: Will all Christians go to heaven, if only they believe in the death on the cross, the ressurrection, etc? If your answer is yes, what happens to Adolf Hitler, Mussollini, etc? All the tyrants who had ever lived but were Christians? Further, my Prophet (as) did not have any hatred for Christians or Jews, individually, except that he and everyone of us have hatred for your dishonest beliefs: You slice God into three, as Christians, making jest of His Majesty by making Him incomplete in knowledge; afterall, it is part of the christian mantra that God had to come to earth as a human to understand the plight of human. Is that really necessary, when He is the Almighty Creator, Knower of everything? In Islam Allah says in His Book that He will not burden a soul more than that soul can bear. He further says that He will not be unjust to His creations. And as to the Jews, they turned God to a tribal God, excluding everyone else! Are they more than creations? Allah says in His Book that He created all, and man will be judged according to individual effort (in true believe and worship and in good deeds according to capability). The Theology of Muhammad (as) is in line with the theology of all previous Prophets: Jesus was not a Christian (I want you to get that into your system and never forget it. If this is the only thing your get from me), and Moses was not a Jewish in religion. Although both of them were from the Tribes of the Children of Israel. But neither, as well as Muhammad preached three or Multiple gods, but to worship in total submission the True One God, in the way he commands. That way is never changing. That way of worship is what the Muslims follow. You Stimulus abandoned it and worship in the way you and your christian community desires. And that is wrong. No one is born with any belief system or religion - and it is high time you wake up from your slumber and begin to engage your thinking! That Muhammad thought that everyone is born as a Muslim is false - because the second part to that idea is also false, since not everyone that leaves The Great Religion automatically becomes a Christian or Jew!You are wrong again: Anything that is unislamic, when examples are shown, it is Christianity and Judaism that are used. Why? They are the closest to Islam and they were the ones mentioned directly in the Qur'an to show a clear group who are deviants. Afterall, the story of Moses is known by Muslims, Christians, Jews, and even Hindus and others. Further he seemed to be a more recent phenom in world history than say Buhddah for example. And by the way, I have had a lot of Hindu associates who have entered the Mosque and lined up to pray with us. Finally, when my children were young, when I began to prepare myself for prayer they quickly joined in. They did not do that with their mother's Church thing. Young people, indeed babies find it natural to bow and prosprate their faces than any othe process or worship or lack of worship, etc. I doubt if you understand anything about natural instinct of man! Every man be annoyed. Every man can be happy. Thats the similarity to being born a Muslim. Afterall, the fetus is in a croutching position, as if bowing, in the womb. Atheists have also rubbished the Qur'an and Islam without any effort. On this Forum, unless you were on a very long break and just started typing without thinking, you have seen the effect of our responses to the "apprentist atheists" who open many threads repeating the same thing but unable to defend their assumptions.Your raining abuse on Therationa, is a good response indeed. What have you said to the fellow's many practical observation of the Bible? Indeed what have you said when Babs787 spoke about your Bible reducing some verses to footnotes in one version and in some other verseswere not present at all? Please don't amuse me. I have not seen where any atheist unless you are referring to Christians as atheists. That I will agree because Islam has acted as the iconoclast on your Bible, so I understand the foxhole mentality. To assume that I have "not put up any effort about it" is to magnify your irascible ignominy! Have you seen these efforts, or you just opened your mouth without some common sense? Sample these:I am a Child. I don't wanna grow up. How do you expect this guy to stand your verbal abuse, especially as many as you are, but saying nothing towards the topic threads. Look, you wanna debate, lets do it as long as you stay on point. No deviations from the topic. I do not get involve in Biblical defense. However I will defend any and all Prophets and since I am a Muslim, I defend Islam. These are the places you will find me. Incase nobody ever told you, you would notice that the same chap predictably started mewling and begging that some of us (4Him, Imhotep and myself) should not post replies in his threads!Stop patting yourself in the back. You have not done anything about anything. I remember that i asked david to defend his religion. You know why, because he has gull and you don't. rather I have not seen you you in that light. In the same way, I noticed babs787 has been in the habit of stealing articles from others and pretending that they were his own! What else explains why he has been ducking the 3 simple questions I offered him in the Trinity thread? Afterall, even therationa was willing initially to discuss issues - and he answered the simple questions I offered him, so that I could provide answers to his queries. WHY HAS IT BEEN DIFFICULT for the blabbing machine (babs787) to simply answer those 3 simple questions on the Trinity thread?You remind me of a friend in Boston. His wife told him to quit complaining like a woman! Action man and lets do the trinity which is not in the bible! Come on already. Quite easy to know why - it is because he knew there are no articles to steal from any websites in defence of those he had stolen from Ahmed Deedat!But these are questions germain to your belief. You can't answer them and you want anybody who is not a Christian to answer John 1;1? You must love to complain. Please stop it before you get married. Women hate it. BTW, I notice the same thing applies to you, olabowale. Although you make good attempts to reason from on your own and not belittle your integrity by plagiarism, still you sound very incoherent so many times. However, the problem with you is that you open your mouth just anyhow, make false assertions (like: "The atheist have been bashing the bible, contacdicts et all and you have not put up any effort about it"Never have been scared of anyone in my entire life. Even when i was a little boy, I did not run away from any real situation that needed my attention. I may pick my fight though, but that should not be construed as being scared. I bet that it is natural for any man not to have the strength to tell his lovely wife that she is unattractive. Even that may be true, but every man will shy away from that boldness. Babyosisi, am I lying? If telling your wife who is unattractive is very beautiful is lying and therefore considered dishonest by the straight as arrow honest Christians, I accept it. I bet you were never married. When you do, and whoever that maybe, there will be some imperfection about her. Please be honest with her and let us know you slept the night of your putting your foot in your mouth? The Trinity was not the reason why people became atheists - you can ask honest atheistically-minded discussants on Nairaland and get a ready answer. For those rascal dishonest "apprentist atheists" who may argue that the Trinity was the very reason why those became atheists, my answer is simple: they should still have been religious folks without abandoning their spirituality!Would they have abandoned spirituality because of Islamic Monotheistic quality of One true God without any association? Who is better informed, a subordiates who answers just one boss or another who has multiple bosses and each boss has a different agenda separate and apart from the others? This is the condition of the Muslim belief versus the christians belief. I wonder why those among religious folks who deny the Trinity are not atheists themselves! The Jehovah Witnesses, Oneness Movement, Muslims, etc. rejected the doctrine of the Trinity but did not become atheists on account of that rejection. I was not born a Muslim (and please don't give me that harrumph about what Muhammad said, false as it is); but even though I initially did not understand the Trinity nor believed it, I still became a Christian and rejected the teachings of Islam! Even Muhammad himself (prophet of Islam) who rejected the doctrine of the Trinity should have abandoned his belief system and become an atheist - according to your argument!Moses denied Trinity and so were the prophets and messengers before him and after him. Indeed Jesus denied Trinity by his famous Mark 12 Verse 29. Also, Muhammad denied Trinity. So Trinity is not a good example and cannot be a yardstick of true belief. You see how puerile your arguments are in many instances? Are you so scared of becoming an atheist after rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity that you have constantly declined from my invitation to discuss it?Atheist is defined as disbelief in God or Higher power, right? How do you think Muslims measures into this concept of Atheist? Maybe by your own idea of believe, since you are clinging so terribly to Trinity,I can see how you you will thaink Muslims, like me may be afraid of being atheist. The one closest to Ibrahiim in belief is the Muslim. Muslim discards every thing else, but cling only to Worship in Submission to One God, who has no partner, no associates, no equal, and He is the only One who creates. "God is Great" is not Arabic! To God be the glory, una go tire about the disappearance of 'Allah' from Nairaland!In Yoruba it means Olorun tobi. In Arabic it means Allahu Akbar. I really thought you have any smart. I have over rated you. I am sorry. In any case, I'm not in the business of rivalry - go and ask Muhammed why he was always in rivalry against Christians and Jews - and even so, his hatred agaiant them has not stopped people believing in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.I wonder how many times you say "God is Great" in one day? And which god will you be referring at that time; son, ghost or father? For me in Arabic, I say it 6 times in every rakah. And I have about 40 rakah in every 24 hours; 17 fard, about 15 sunnah and 7 quiyyamulail. Which mean in Arabic I say it about 240 times, not counting the times i may say Olorun tobi in Yoruba. I guess when Hutchington was discussing with Al Sharpton in New York, he mention the Islam before any other was purely coincidental? All of a sudden, one Arab woke up screaming his 'adhan' in your minaret, trying to "rival" Jews and Christians - and you have continued to slur the Trinity unabated as if we do not have a legitimacy to also object to your brigand derision of Christian convictions.Not Just One Arab. He was the direct descendant of Ibrahiim (Hanifan). He did not rival the Jews and Christians. He came to correct them; Just the same way jesus came about 600 plus years earlier to tell the Jews to shape up. You have no legitimacy to argue at all, except that your heart is devoid of any true belief. I've warned you olabowale to be respectful of people's convictions - you may not believe in the Trinity; but that is no licence for you to keep up your cowardly remarks about what you have no clues about. May I once again extend this invitation to you and babs787:You can not win by attrition. You have to argue fair and direct. My mother was a Christian before her convertion. I was married to a Christian before. I went to Christian High School. How much should I have to know before I know what is unacceptable? If you'd be willing to discuss the Trinity, I'd be glad to enter that discussion with you - but you'd first have to go to the Trinity thread and deal with the 3 simple questions I offered there, then we'll clear up babs787's plagiarism of Ahmed Deedat on John 1:1, and then go on to see what exactly the OT prophets have declared in their prophecies about God.I will be at your Trinity thread today. And i bet you will still complain. The Bible is corrupt and it does not stand a chance as any barometer to measure Truth, except what the Qur'an accept from it. Rather than keep playing this uncivil games you have been endlessly ducking yourselves, please be gentlemanly enough to seek a sane and responsible discussion on your misgivings. Do you care to oblige that invitation?I will be there. You must have been reading and seeing things with candlelight from a smoking flax! I do not argue to fill pages - and as you can see, I have been concise in my rejoinders against the plethora of duplicated threads opened to ridicule Christianity. For all of that, where have the antagonists stood their own grounds and debated rationally? You're only wishing that my contributions have amounted to zero - and to such kinds of whimpering, my answer is straight and simple: either you take me up intellectually, philosophically, or theologically and prove your mettle; or otherwise just simply zip your molars and stop entertaining the forum with your jejune supercilious crank!I have more that Molars in my mouth. Boy you complain too much. I'm truly sorry for your cataract and myopia! Who was it that was begging and mewling after reading our answers to his pretended scholarship - was it not the same therationa?Too much complaint. Yes I have no shame when it comes to religion. They could not be bothered with your incoherent twaddle.You easily could have approached the embayology subject. But your spirit of complaining will not let you see it. What have you said about the dismantling exposé on the pretended scholarship of "Qur'anic science" in this thread (The Qur'an on Human Embryonic Development)?!?Simple and direct: Was knowledge this advanced 100 years ago about any subjuct, specifically Human Embryology? Will the advancement on this subject be the same as it is today, say 200 years from now? If your answer is no to both, how come can anyone truly conclude that Qur'anic presentation of it isincorrect? You're such a pitiful laugh!Am laughing at you already. You must love to complain. Whatever your conviction, we already know that Muslims have been seeking to bend the Qur'an to fit science, which is what the above link addresses. And as many times as they continue to do so, the irascible shame will be exposed.Do not worry about it. Islam brought Europe out of her dark ages. InshaAllah, it will lead the world again. However, we have been on the subject of the SOUL, and I'm still waiting for your answer to my challenge about your falsification of m_nwankwo's statements in this thread: Spirit, Soul And Body. Have you found the exact line where you tried to put words in his mouth? When you find me that line, then I'll give you my thoughts on what exactly is the SOUL.What did i fabricate from it: Soul being Spirit? He said it and I have always known it from the Qur'an. I do not have to bend his statement to fit my agenda. God made it plain already. It is you who have to explain in many different ways. You see truth is one. fallacy has many versions. Does versions remind you of anything? Do you care to discuss babs787's plagiarism of Ahmed Deedat on John 1:1?Sheikh Ahmed Deedat (ra) was a Muslim. Did you expect Babs 787 to go and quote from say Jimmy Swaggert? You must be joking. I will discuss it. But I wanna talk about your Trinity, first. Which again I asked you if you'd be interested in dicussing the Trinity - did you ever honour that invitation? WHERE?Obsessed with Trinity? Lets do it. Now. Scared already? You've been making so much noise about issues you had no clue; and babs787 made a bigger noise with his plagiarized articles from Deedat on the Greek terms in John's Gospel. You, babs787, Ahmed Deedat put together are puling kids. If babs787 had no clue about the Greek, what was he doing quoting Deedat's illiterate arguement on the Greek in John 1:1?Sorry Nwando. This guy complaint worse than a woman scourned. He will be inconsistent in the trinity Thread when i deal with him: shifting from Greek to Hebrew. You'll see. But which one came first Greek or Hebrew? Which one is the language of revelation? That is what we will deal with. It is inevitable to ask you to consider the words in the languages - Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. I'm no expert on any of those 3 languages; but I undertand enough Greek and Hebrew to school you boys on your plagiarized noise on this Forum. And NO - I'm not running to any website to plagiarize anything. Just let me know when you're done with your boohoos!You could not scholl a child to learn the alphabets, in english or in your mother tongue. You will go to some websites to cull up the meaning anyway. It could either be right, or wrong or partially of both but not addressing the proper meaning in the proper usage or meaning in the original language of revelation. For sure you do not read a word of Greek, Hebrew or the dead language Aramaic. I read Arabic. This is the difference. And my dealling with Jews and Greek will just be a phone call away. Then for once and for all, throw your Arabic Qur'an away! These typical panic measures are the same thing I witnessed from debating these issues with other Muslims from other sites!You are very foolish. You think I want to end up like you? No I have no ned for punishment from Allah the Powerful. Have you ever seen a Bible in Aramaic or Hebrew before? Lets leave the year of publication alone. When you finally seen one, I will ask you to go back and get the Toral in the period that Jesus was alive and the Gospel that he preached at that time. When you compare the two with anything you have now, they are dissimilar. This is why what you have now is lost and also corrupted. And what has that got to do with all this? Okay, buy a carton of gum, sit down tight and chew all you can when I take you to task on your noise!It is an american expression dating back to President Gerald Ford; They said he could not do two things at the same time; Like walk and talk, because fell so often that they you to lapoon him as such. You couldn't get it. Well. As soon as you and babs787 answer those 3 questions on the Trinity thread!This is between me and you. If babs787 wants to join in or anyone from your camp, its fine with me. But we do not have to stray too far off topic. Deal? By carefully looking at the concept in the Bible itself.How can you be looking for soething that you have no idea that is there in the first place? Is there a Book that says that is before the Bible that mentioned Trinity and that says it must be in the Bible? How do you write a Beautiful Book and it is missing the Title in it and you are trying to justify that the idea of the title is in the Book? No, in just the same way that 'Muhammad' is not a word in the Bible either.Muhammad was not there. But Ahmad was there. Ahmad means comforter and any derivative of it. I will address that later. The Qur'an states that one of the duties of jesus son of Mary is to announce the coming of the Messenger/Prothet whose name is Ahmad ( Surah Saffa verse 6). When we verify what Ahmad means we see that it means Comforter or the one who comforts, reliefs, etc. Afterall, there was no other that came after jesus left, was there in human history, over 2000 years now? If you have no reason to look at what the Bible teaches, then you have no reason why any Muslim should try to fathom the idea that Muhammad is in the Bible. And if you cannot find Muhammad in the Bible, then your Muslim scholars have been plainly lying in asserting that he is there! Which again makes the Qur'an a false book by asking Muslims to believe in the teachings of the Biblical prophets! How do you plead in the face of this dilemma?All that we need to know about the past prophets/messengers are in the Qur'an. We are commanded to believe in the Pure Books of Allah; Not the impure versions that you carry about now. From the time that Qur'an says that you have corrupt books, you have not been able to shake loose the stigma of impurity. You fill your arguments with incoherent nonsense - stay on course or upgrade your reading skills.Thank you for the advise. But no running away, yeah. As soon as you and babs787 answer those 3 simple questions I offered on the Trinity thread.You must be a bore. You complain too much. |
| Christianity Etc › Re: 4him I Need A Reply From You. by olabowale(m): 2:38am On Feb 17, 2008 |
I just want to know how is it that these people saw God and in another place, it was declared no one ever saw God? How large is this God that the earth could be standinga nd the heavens were not torn into shreds? How is it that the Children of Israel asked that moses should be the one talking to God, because they are afraid that they will die, if god spoke to them, yet in the verse above, it seemed as if God spoke to them? |
. There is no certainty as to the occurence of the singularity. String theory currently offers some of the better answers, but they can't be totally falsified as yet. However, to use string theory, sigularities may have emerged from collisions branes. Another possibility in theoretical physics, is that a quantum fluctuation could cause a singularity to emerge.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 (of 214 pages)