₦airaland Forum

@ mrpataki & davidylan,

They have pushed their luck too far this time - thanks to babs787. I'm least interested in the skeptic websites from where he ferrets his baseless arguments; nevermind that his R-IQ blinds him to the multiplied garboil the same websites throw at Muslims and Islam.

When he wakes up from the previous post, we shall next explore other areas of the Quraish twister.

Cheers.

@babs787,

You're only being hilarious when you use a familiar term you borrowed from the Christians on the forum. I guess the Qur'an has no English equivalent for "escapist", and that's why you love to often use the term for those who answer you well.

In any case, I admit to being an escapist actually - I've escaped once and for all from all the demented atrocities and abuses of the Quraish prophet. And I'm so thankful that none of my daughters will be dolls for Muhammad's pedophilia; nor will any one of my sons be used for further gratification of the gay Imams in jannah like the young boys being promised to those long bearded brigand.

Escapist, you say? Indeed. Why don't you just dress warm and see more of why Muhammad's sins will take him to the hell he threatened upon his enemies? Perhaps, a hot cup of Ovaltine will help you sweat more when you read about how the Lord Jesus Christ will judge that pedophilic, incestuous, marauding twister . . . as well as pluck all the 72 virgins from his hands and from those of his rapacious companions.

It's all about this topic: The Second Coming of Jesus Christ!

So, keep reading about the Quriash sinner and learn a few things. Cheers.

@babas787,

Now, the noise you've been making all this while about my posting some of the verses from both the Qur'an and Hadith, here they are. We are quite aware that most Muslims readily deny the statements in the Hadith where they are embarrashing; but the very vital reason for quoting them here is the fact that the Qur'an claims Muhammad is the epitome and example that Muslims should emulate:

Qur'an 33:21
"Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah."

How true is this "beautiful pattern (of conduct)" will become clear as we examine the following verses. First, let us see how Muhammad handled sexual lewdness:

MUHAMMAD'S SEXUAL LEWDNESS

1. Was Muhammad a pedophile?

Sahih Muslim, Book 8: Number 3310: The Book of Marriage [Kitab Al-Nikah] -
"A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old"

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
"Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death)."

Abu Dawud, Vol. 2, Number 2116:
Aisha said, "The Apostle of Allah married me when I was seven years old. (The narrator Sulaiman said: "Or six years.". "He had intercourse with me when I was 9 years old."

2. Did Muhammad commit incest (sex with his relation)?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 18
Narrated 'Ursa: The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."
[note the threat in his tone to impose his wishes on Abu Bakr, and Muhammad's arrant disregard for *Allah and his Book.]

3. Did Muhammad use the Qur'an as an licence for his lewd incest?

Sura 033.050
"O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
[Not only did Muhammad use the Qur'an as a licence for incest, but he also used it to buttress his sexual perversion and womanizing, rape of war victims and prostitution. Note well that he arrogated this privilege only to himself and not to other Muslims.]

4. Did Muhammad respect the dowry rites in Aisha's case when he snatched her from her parents?.

Tabari IX:131
"My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse took over and wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was brought in while Muhammad was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. The other men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old. Neither a camel nor a sheep was slaughtered on behalf of me.”

5. Was Muhammad driven by sex even during his spiritual activities?

Sunaan Abu Dawud: Book 13, Number 2380:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) used to kiss her and suck her tongue when he was fasting.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 173
Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "If you enter (your town) at night (after coming from a journey), do not enter upon your family till the woman whose husband was absent (from the house) shaves her pubic hair and the woman with unkempt hair, combs her hair" Allah's Apostle further said, "(O Jabir!) Seek to have offspring, seek to have offspring!"

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3240:
Jabir reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) saw a woman, and so he came to his wife, Zainab, as she was tanning a leather and had sexual intercourse with her. He then went to his Companions and told them: The woman advances and retires in the shape of a devil, so when one of you sees a woman, he should come to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart.

6. Were the companions of Muhammad involved in the same sexual lewdness as the Quraish prophet?

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 135:
Narrated Jabir: We used to practice coitus interruptus during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle
[Note carefully the implications of this: the Prophet's reaction to this practice seem more likely to have been one of consent and not diapproval.]

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 136:
Narrated Jabir:We used to practice coitus interruptus while the Quran was being revealed.
[Notice that it was an ongoing and well-established practice among them while the Qur'an was being revealed.]

Sahih Bukhari: Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."

7. What was Muhammad's view of women in his sexual adventures?

Qur'an 2:223
"Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad)."

8. Where was Muhammad when he received the verses of the Qur'an:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5 Book 57 Number 119
". . .the Prophet said, "O Um Salama! Don't trouble me by harming 'Aisha, for by God, the Divine Inspiration never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman amongst you except her."

9. In all of this, did Muhammad feel righteous or sinful about his career?

Sahih Bukhari, Invocations Volume 8, Book 75, Number 319
Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Apostle saying." By Allah! I ask for forgiveness from Allah and turn to Him in repentance more than seventy times a day."

Now the facts are all here, and only a few are quoted. Question: did Muhammad do those things we read of in the Qur'an and Hadith, or did he not??

@babs787,

You didn't surprise me at all by your lengthy rejoinder, and I'll just ignore the invectives for the moment. I could just keep up the argument for the fun of it, but from previous entries it doesn't seem you're getting any wiser when your concerns are addressed. I already knew where you were coming, and it's a laugh to read your response:

babs787:

shahan link=topic=29381.msg825786#msg825786 date=1169145653:
The questions you've raised are not new, neither are they personally yours - they're ferreted from Skeptic websites, and have been variously dealt with. . .

From the websites where you ferreted them?

none of your business and are you afraid?

So, you admit they are from skeptic websites and not personally yours. It is actually my business to know where you guys are coming from, and what your underlying motives are, before I bother to post any replies. Since you're desperate to just recycle such and fill the pages on Nairaland, I'd better leave you to keep chasing the wind. Interestingly enough, the same Skeptic websites have listed numerous contradictions in Qur'an, and I haven't seen Christians playing the same wild game of cut and paste as is characteristic of your crew.

Whenever you have genuine questions of your own to ask, post them - and like I did previously on this thread, I'll come back with solid answers from the Bible.

Now, as to your concerns about the Trinity, have you noticed that almost all the sources you referenced were making categorical denials of what the Old Testament taught? None of those 'scholars' have examined OT texts like Isaiah 9:6 and identified who was being referred to as "the Mighty God". Indeed, the word "Trinity" does not explicitly appear in the Bible, as again the word "Bible" does not appear in either the OT or the NT. The point is that none of those scholars have been able to satisfactorily refute the doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ even if we take Isaiah 9:6 and Psa. 2:12 alone.

When one carefully reads the Bible as it is, even in its original wording before Muhammad emerged, the conclusive testimony shows very clearly that Jesus Christ is God - and that is as far back as the 1st century when John 1:1 was penned.

@luckyCO,

Gladly, I'll find time later tonight after my very busy schedule to post something for you. It's weekend again, and usually mine is very often busy. Hope you enjoy yours.

Cheers.

@belloti,

You really don't want to know what images I grew with about Muslims and Islam before I became a Christian. Some of the things you described actually are on a higher scale among the core leaders of Islam, but we know that such issues do not sizzle out to the press. You could just imagine what some Muslim men have done with the promise of liquor and sex in jannah.

When I travelled out, I hated the hypocrisy of those who called themselves "Christians", and even thought the Qur'an was actually true is its declaration about the infidels. However, in God's providence, I was exposed to the grace of honest and devoted Christians who showed me in the Bible that the hypocrisy actually was denounced by God!

Even so, I didn't become a Christian until later when my Dad surprised the family of his two-year old conversion from Islam. He had spent those two years going through every verse of the Qur'an again, and emerged thoroughly convinced that another Jesus was being taught in Islam.

What I just want you to understand here is that your niece's theology does not bear any weight in the face of reality. If anyone wants an excuse to believe anything bad about authentic Christianity, they could just as well turn to your niece - I know, because i've been there before. However, if you have truly been touched by the living grace and power of the Lord Jesus Christ, the mascara will wash and there'll be no doubts left as to what Islam actually is - a religion that has no saving grace before God.

We have some thinking heads on NL.

@Bobbyaf,

Sorry, but no thanks. The reason why Paul wouldn't have rebuked me is that you're misquoting him and putting words in his mouth. Do I suspect that you conveniently missed the texts I offered because SDA is spearheaded by a woman (Ellen G. White)??

@mrpataki,

Oya, divulge it before I let loose on you kia-kia!

One. . .

. . .two

. . .three -

I'm still counting O!


Lol, how body?? Hope you're doing great. Hey, many thanks for the IM messages, wasn't signed on to Yahoo IM when you tried contacting me. Perhaps this p.m. we'll get to gist and laugh some more - just between us, abi??

_{<<But if you yarb, I go dump you for lagoon O! At least the 1-to-1 between us na tribute to you!!>>}

Have fun. Bless.

@Analytical,

I could almost say the same thing about you, except for the fact that you revealed your gender much earlier. You have been quite forthright, passionate with deep grace, and served my reference notes for further studies. What more can I say?? Well, one thing actually. . .

                      [size=14pt]This is a living tribute to Analytical![/size]

And thank you so very much for the reminder to be calm in the face of invectives.

Many blessings.

Bobbyaf:
The context of the word prophesying as you will agree means to teach, correct?

Rom 12:6-7
Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching.

Bobbyaf:
Paul's comments about women in the city of Corinth, and in other locations, as it relates to them not teaching in the churches, was never meant to be a precedence for all women throughout all dispensations.

Paul's comments?

I Cor. 14:37 - "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."

Does not relate to teaching in the churches?

I Cor. 14:34-35
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

@lafile,

For security reasons, please contact me by email and you'll get all the gist.

@belloti,

Well, the cat's outa d bag, as they say. We had fun while it lasted, and goodguy had such a great sense of humour to have created this thread so the fun continues. I'm still not fully recovered from his last shot that levels the score. . . but soon!

Nevermind my sometimes very passionate debates: I try to be level-headed and civil. Many people have displayed great acumen and reserve; and I think you're one of those gentlemen. Cheers and many blessings.

Preach? Yes.

Teach in Church? Nope.

@jayon. . .lol.

Just take it easy on our brethren - we are all learning.

I bet you that he'll forget "to take them pills" (as erudite gbade.x usually observes) before he returns with his goose's cry tomorrow. When he sees this, his errand boy "y.k.yussuf prof, OAU inaugural lecture,2006" will gather them for another "inaugural lecture, 2007" - in the same motorpark where they convoke!

That may well be one of the few reasons.

In my dark days, I lied out of fear, frustration, fun, . . .or plain fury!

Never knew it was so easy to live a transparently honest life before God and man - but thank God for His saving grace in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Lol, @Havila!

Okay, so that I don't risk another off-topic gist on this thread, I've posted a reply at this one: Shahan, A Female? Wow!.

Cheers.

@Havila,

From this other link:
Why Christianity Is Wrong.

So, here it is:

Havila:
@Shahan,
At the risk of going off-topic; with regard to you guys discussion on whether women should preach or not, thought I don't feel like contributing but I believe and totally support women preaching in churches. Using Titus and Timothy alone will confound other scriptural references in support because issue of periodic and contextual tradition comes in; but really I don't want to go into it. Personally, I am indifferent to who is preaching, male or female, but concerned about the message being preached. e.g the current head of the episcopal church in the US is a woman, I don't mind but had it been that I am Anglican, I will disagree with her ministry and belief such as support for ordination of gay priests, and gay marriage among others
By The Way, you are such a gifted and brilliant bible teacher from your various discussions, if someone like you refuses to teach in your church because of your gender, did God make a mistake in giving you such wisdom and knowledge (probably more than most male folks in your church) for the edification of the church? Definitely not!!

Lol, @Havila!

You may not know this, but I'm not one to assume that my gift qualifies me to teach in the church. Preach? Yes.  But teach in church? I'd have to dribble round those texts in order for me to assume the responsibility.

As for the "gifted and brilliant bible teacher", I think that applies more to you and most of the erudite male pastors on Nairaland than to me. Am I smarter than some males? Certainly - like my bro, m4malik! (Oops! )

Anyhow, I've been immensely blessed by y'all ministry on the Forum and want y'all to keep it up.

Bless up. 

Have you ever told a lie? What makes you tell one so comfortably?

Thanks for bringing out the salient points on the present subject, and thereby adding to my understanding.

Cheers.

@babyosisi,

There is no "assuming" anything in this case, my sister! Havila hit just the point I was about posting, but here it is anyway:

Havila:

islampride link=topic=31610.msg822595#msg822595 date=1169023149:
when the queen of england addresses the populace, she says 'we have decided to,' 'we shall' etc.
so dumb ass, shahan, WE as found in the Quran is nothig other than the royal WE. UHMN.
And this is even seen in the english language now(y.k.yussuf prof, OAU inaugural lecture,2006)

Really dumb guy, the Queen never ever said "we"; she alway says "My kingdom" or "My Government". If you want a recording of the last Queens speech why not go online and get a copy for prof yusuf. Talk of looking for any reason to hide the truth that is glaring to all except cerebrally bereft peoples with "Reverse IQ" (brilliant phrase borrowed from dear Shahan)

Thank you o jare, Havila. Let's help the R-IQ with a link of an example of the Queen's Speech on 15 November 2006.

Excerpts:

"My lords and members of the House of Commons, my government will pursue policies aimed at meeting the challenges which the United Kingdom faces at home and abroad.

A stable economy is the foundation of a fair and prosperous society. My government will continue to maintain low inflation, sound public finances and high employment.

. . .

Other measures will be laid before you.

My Lords and Members of the House of Commons: I pray that the blessing of Almighty God may rest upon your counsels."

The recklessness of the duplicity of these R-IQs still has no equal in the book of the most dangerous species yet alive.

@goodguy,

Hehehe. . I'm still dazed, so just play cool at your goal post as I prepare a good shot for you!

@babyosisi,
Na wah for that guy Gwaine! He just show once, then disappear! Anyway, good to know that he's fine and keeping good!

@Gwaine,

Oya make I shout again maybe you go just majik yourself again:  GWAINE!! G-W-A-[size=14pt]I[/size]-[size=16pt]N[/size]-[size=14pt]E[/size] O-O!! 

Havila:
You know he also "received" revelation of the 3 "daughter" goddesses of Allah (called al-Lat, al-Uzzah and Manat) in order to convince the polytheistic Arab pagans to accept his new ideology of "pseudo-monotheism" called Islam at that time. The guy na just one 419 prophet of the devil!

The initials A.L.M. in Qur'an.2 vs.1 is highly suggestive of those 3 daughter goddesses. No sincere Islamic scholar has been able to unravel the mystery of those letters; and the suggestions by Pickthal and Shakir that it is "Alif. Lam. Mim" is disingenuous and simply cutting corners to protect the religion from its obvious polytheistic paganism. Reading the whole chapter (286 verses) reveals several speakers besides the chief idol *allah. Sample verse 252 by Pickthal and Shakir:

PICKTHAL: These are the portents of Allah which We recite unto thee (Muhammad) with truth, and lo! thou art of the number of (Our) messengers;
SHAKIR: These are the communications of Allah: We recite them to you with truth; and most surely you are (one) of the messengers.

@TV01,

Your entry on Heb. 9:27 is interesting. However, I'm sorry to particularly note that it bears no relation to the context and nuances characteristic throughout the epistle. Nevermind the cosmetic overshadowing of trying to class others' interpretation as dogma and tradition; but here are a few things for you to think through:

TV01:
He would take the blood of a ritually specified sacrifice to make atonement in place of himself).

While the verse embraces a wider sphere of 'men' in a generic sense, your idea narrows it down to just the high priest. What is more to the point is that the verse focuses on death appointed unto men rather than unto the priests in the holy place.

Secondly, the statement "to make atonement in place of himself" already defeats your argument, because it supposes that death was appointed unto the sacrifice rather than unto men.

Thirdly, if you understand a bit of the perculiar construct of the epistle, you could not fail to see that the death appointed unto men is in striking apposition to the judgement that follows afterwards. If you ignore the judgement, then you'd have to retrace your steps back to the question of what death is being spoken of in that verse.

TV01:
This refers to the appointment of the house of Aaron (as HP) to ceremonially die once (but this was done vicariously via the ritual offering).

Again, you miss the point.

(a) It was not to the house of Aaron that the appointment was made, but rather to men in a general sense. It does not even stand to reason that they were "to ceremonially die once" in a vicarious sense, because Heb. 9:27 is clear that the appointment unto death was unto men, and not the animals used for the sacrifices.

(b) Notice it says to die "once"; and if we go by your assumptions, then that would make it a vicarious death that occured many times! "And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins" (Heb. 10:11). If the priest stood daily to offer the same sacrifice oftentimes, that doesn't sound like dying once, does it??

TV01:
The judgement being the judgement of God on the sacrifice offered for atonement.

C'mon, TV01. You're substituting your personal ideas in place of God's clear and holy Word. It does not say that at all. Rather, the death was unto men, and the judgement followed after the death. It does not say that the death was appointed unto the sacrifice, but unto men!

TV01:
But then the Bible, the Gospel is essentially simple. It doesn't require heaps of theorising and lengthy discourse, nor does it need excessive spiritualising. Default positions arise as a result of dogma.

I think you just did exactly what you denounced.

TV01:
I feel we've all been given pieces off the big picture. We can seek Him for yet more, and come together to share. The Christian discourse on Nairaland is hereby declared a Dogma-free, tradition-free, mog-free zone! Give God glory.

Glory!

Oh well.

Your question at first:

GeeCee:
could you please refer me to the verse of the bible where jesus commanded that it should be done

I thought it was just about the texts where Jesus expressly commanded that it should be done, and not the mode of the baptism.

Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:16 point to Jesus' commandment on baptism.

For the mode of baptism, see the following:

Matt. 3:16 - "And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him."

Act 8:38-39
"And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing."

                       Baptism is by immersion.

Cheers.

@Havila,

Many thanks for bringing this point into fine perspective. By stating "Muhammad's rejection of the paganistic worship of the Arabs", I didn't elaborate on that as much as you did:

Havila:
At some point in Muhammad’s life, he was convinced probably by the early Arab Christians that Polytheism was wrong and sought to reject the 360 pagan gods he had grown up with.

However, a small concern in your post:

Havila:
. . .Rather than converting all the Arab people to the monotheism of Christianity, Muhammad merely banished the other 359 pagan gods and chose the one remaining to be the one and only god, what Muslims refer to today as "Allah". Thus Islam was born.

While I recognise that there are varying persuasions on the underlying factors for Muhammad's choice of the chief idol *allah, I would say that the Quraish prophet reserved 3 other paganistic idols in his newly founded religion. These are the daughter idols of the chief *allah, and who are represented by the 3 initials in the second chapter of the Qur'an.

The initials are A.L.F. - and erudite muslim scholars will admit that no one knows the meaning of this "mystery"; and any attempt to investigate what they are, will meet with stiff resistance and threat to allude them to the daughter idols. Shakir attempts to supply a rendition for these initials as "Alif Lam Mim", and that is only duplicity. When you read the chapter 2 itself, you can't miss the fact that these daughter idols referred to the chief idol *allah in the second place singular (thy Lord, He, Him, your Guardian-Lord), while they continually make statements referring to themselves in the first person plural (WE, OUR, and US).

Matt. 28:19 - "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Mark 16:16 - "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

babs787:
6. u claimed is 100% complete, where r the books mentioned here
a. Book of the Covenant
Exodus 24:7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient.
There are those that believe the Book of the Covenant is found in Exodus chapters 20 through 23. There are no authoritative sources for this text.

You fail to see the obvious because you have become really caked up in heart and mind to reject truth. Please see verses 3 and 4 of Exodus 24 for your answer.

babs787:
b. Book of the Wars of the Lord
Numbers 21:14 Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord, What he did in the Red sea, and in the brooks of Arnon,
Certain sources believe that this is to be found by drawing text from several Old Testament books. There are no authoritative sources for this text.

Again, as above.

babs787:
c. Book of Samuel the Seer
1 Chronicles 29:29 Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer,

I & II Samuel.

babs787:
d. Nathan the Prophet
1 Chronicles 29:29 Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer,
2 Chronicles 9:29 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?

Nathan was a prophet in Israel - is there anything contained I & II Samuel and I & II Chronicles that were not corroborated in the book of Nathan the porphet?

babs787:
e. Acts of Solomon
1 Kings 11:41 And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the book of the acts of Solomon?

And what essential message in Solomon's career are missing in the OT canon?

babs787:
f. NUMBERS 21:14
"Wherefore it is said in the BOOK OF THE WARS OF THE LORD, What He did in the Red Sea, and in the brooks of Arnon, "
Has any one during an Archeological dig(to prove the Bible) found this little gem?

I can't laugh enough at your blabs, babs787. If there were no records of any such events in Exodus and other books of the OT canon, one could sympathise with your poor scholarship. What you need to understand is the fact of the events being authentic and recorded in the OT itself. If your concern was for archeological confirmation of the Bible, there are loads of them. Not to even say a word about the unverifiable tales of the Qur'an.

babs787:
g. JOSHUA10:13
", Is this not written in the BOOK OF JASHER?"
Does any one know where this book is?

As above.

babs787:
h. I KINGS 11:41
"And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are not written in the BOOK OF THE ACTS OF SOLOMON?"
Could someone let me know where this book is?

Again, as explained above.

babs787:
i. 1 CHRONICLES 29:29
"Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written a BOOK OF SAMUEL THE SEER, and in the BOOK OF NATHAN THE PROPHET, and in the BOOK OF GAD THE SEER,, "
Does anyone know where I may find these original books?

Already explained above.

babs787:
Many more still coming

From the websites where you ferreted them?

babs787:
Also under the Mosaic Law,Another taking all women and children as spoils of war by Moses,Moses was a murderer before he became a Prophet,Killing all of the "suckling infants" by the thousands by Saul,Dashing little children against rocks in the book of Psalm!Praising the dashing of little children against rocks as a form of revenge,42 innocent children were killed using Wild Bears by Prophet Elisha.

I am still waiting where you mentioned that Jesus Christ commanded Christians to do the same. It's so hilarious that when Muhammad's atrocities are highlighted, muslim apologist will run to the same OT books that they condemn and which the Qur'an claims *allah sent down to Moses. On the one hand they deny the claims of the Qur'an, and then next quote those same books to "prove" that the Bible prophesied about Muhammad!

babs787:
Cutting the hands and feet of the enemies in the Bible, and hanging their alive bodies on trees until they DIE,David's Selective Murders,David so carelessly killed an innocent man for only telling him news,X-Rated Pornography in the Bible, by King Solomon!

This has all been thrashed out before on this Forum, at the end of which no muslim was able to deny the perversion of Muhammad's sexual escapades. What is really biting you guys is the fact that Muhammad's sin are so glaring; and by the very texts of the Qur'an and Hadith, he is a self-confessed fraud.

babs787:
Literally, women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine",

Pity. You quote a runaway "research" of a muslim retard that based that idea on a verse in Ecclesiatis, and till this very day has been unable to defend it.

babs787:
and brothers can "suck" their sisters' and lovers' privates,Fathers' fingers into their daughters' vaginas!
Under the Mosaic Law, fathers were allowed to do "Digital.

No wories - for you're just stating exactly what Muhammad and his followers did by claiming it is in the Mosaic law. to date, Olabowale's research on long beards still begs an erudite defence from you guys; belloti's sex and worship is still unresolved - and who is loudest about sexual perversion when Muhammad's companions claimed that the Qur'an was being revealed as they were having coitus interruptus? Even Muhammad himself confirmed that no revelation came to him at any other time than when he was on Aisha, satisfying his pedophilia.

@babs787,

We can either do this as grown ups, or you invite the very same syrup you serve others. So here goes:

Your neurosis has no equal in medical history, so I'll just carefully handle your recycled theory in the hope that you'd learn something. The questions you've raised are not new, neither are they personally yours - they're ferreted from Skeptic websites, and have been variously dealt with. Nonetheless, let me help you:

babs787:
Christians believe that Moses wrote the first five books,

Do you have another reference to deny that claim?

babs787:
1. I want you to explain this, how could someone write his Obituary before his death.
"So Moses, DIED, and he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM (Moses), He was 120 years old WHEN HE DIED, and there arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses, (Deuteronomy 34:5-10)"

Moses penned those words exactly as revealed to him by God. The fact that he wrote about his own death did not make him cower like Muhammad would have; and the sincerity of that blessed servant is accentuated by the fact that he did not change a word of what was given him by inspiration - even though it recorded his own death before he actually died.

babs787:
2. Christians believe that Joshua wrote the below book, please explain how he managed to write his death before his demised.
And it came to pass after these things, that Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, DIED, … And they BURIED HIM … And Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that over lived Joshua, and which had known all the works of the Lord, that he had done for Israel ….(Joshua 24:29-33)"

In just precisely the same way that Moses was inspired to write the Pentateuch. If you worry about the nature of prophetic language, that's simply because Muhammad could not see beyond his nose; and anything that he found contradictory, he and his idol *allah arranged to abrogate it and replace them with new pretences.

babs787:
3. Christians believe that jesus was given the Torah. In your bible, which part comprises the torah from Mathew to revelation?

Are you that confused? Or, do you suddenly have your wires knotted to confuse the belief of Muslims for that of Christians?

babs787:
4. also was Mathew the author of gospel of Mathew, please explain
And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"

Ohh babs787, how does that verse disprove Matthew as the author of the Gospel bearing his name in the NT?

babs787:
5. explain the below contradictions please
a. Jesus' last words
Matt.27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" , Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."
Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."
John19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

What is the contradiction in those verses? What you call contradictions fail to consider that these are sequences of events that transpired that very day. Jesus said and did all those things in sequence; and if you carefully check it out, you find that He cried out more than once. See it in Matt. 27:50 -

(a) "about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice. . . Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice. . ."

The problem is that many people suppose the cry was only once and then quickly see a contradiction. Help yourself, babs787. . . take a very, very careful look at any verse before you draw inferences. When you collate all the references together, you can't miss the point. I will be more than willing to share them with you if you still have concerns; but read all inclusive instead of in isolation: Matt. 27:34-50; Luke 23:46; Mark 15:22-37; John 19: 29-30.

babs787:
b. Judas died how?
"And he cast down the pieces of silver into the temple and departed, and went out and hanged himself." (Matt. 27:5)
"And falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all of his bowels gushed out." (Acts 1:18)

Again, Matt. 27:5 summarizes what Judas did as he committed sucide (he "went and hanged himself"; Acts 1:18 rather shows how he died ("falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst". Obviously, in his suicide attempt, Judas fell headlong and burst in the midst - which does not negate the summary statement that he committed suicide.

babs787:
c. Did those with Saul/Paul at his conversion hear a voice?
ACT 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
ACT 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

In Acts 22, Paul spoke Hebrew to the crowd (vs. 2) and used a very familiar expression, "to hear not the voice" which meant "to not understand what is being heard". You can see this again as used in John 8:43 "Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word." The context shows clearly that the crowd heard the sound of the voice speaking; but they did not understand the substance what they heard.

So, in Acts 9:7 Paul's companion were "hearing a voice" (the sound), but they did not understand the message (the substance). Compare the same sense in I Cor. 14:11 - "Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, . ."