@sage,

How bodi? Let's see what your latest entry says:

sage:

well let me take a softer approach. Sometimes i feel i come on a lil to strong and i might be attacking the heart of the beliefs of many.

But i still want people to open their bibles and stop believing a lie.

That's precisely what we would like you to do - open your own Bible and bring out a verse that says Jesus went to the place prepared for the devil and his angels - the LAKE OF FIRE!

sage:

Can you please make a step by step analysis of my post in which i posted those scriptures. Now its no longer hellfire (now uve seen jesus went to hell too), its lake of fire.

Not once did I dispute the "hell" in Acts 2:31; so trying to suggest I did simply is mute. My contention has been that the wicked are cast into the LAKE OF FIRE - and death and hell shall be cast there too (Rev. 20:14). A step by step analysis of your post would say nothing at the present as long as you've failed to see the distinction in others.

sage:

Its not just Jude 7 that you are now trying to explain away my dear. The destruction of Edom was also likend to eternal fire. Il get the scriptures for you.

I didn't offer you any explanations for Jude 7 other than simply stating that I don't pander to the weak force-fit of those who use it as an umpire's whistle for denying the reality of the final judgement.

sage:

Eternal anahilation is liken to eternal fire in the bible. It signifies destruction and not fire

Sorry, I'm not one of those who subscribe to the non-existent doctrine of annihilation - let alone the concept of "eternal annihilation". If annihilation, as you say, signifies destruction and not fire, then you have only mananged to expose your difficulty in accepting the clear statements of Scripture.

sage:

It was never Gods plan to put people into fire and will never be.

Rev. 20:15 -  "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

sage:

Disprove those scriptures and stop trying to use rev 20:8 as hell fire. The bible defines the lake of fire as the second death. If hell fire were to be thrown into the lake of fire and both were fire, i wonder if the person orchastrating this is confused.

I think the confusion would be minimised in your post if you follow clear statements and not introduce concepts through the back door. No one here has said that "HELL FIRE" would be thrown into the "LAKE OF FIRE!" Jesus did NOT go to HELL-FIRE, and Rev. 20:14 says simply "hell" will be cast into "the lake of fire". I don't remember having used Rev. 20:8 to imply anything in your supposition.

sage:

The bible shows that the people in hell are dead. So death(not a physical thing) and hell (u think its fire) will now be thrown into fire? hear yourself girl.

I hear you; but your strained supposition has no bearing in Scripture nor in my post. As above, please read Revelation 20:14.

sage:

Rev 21:3,4 shows that death will be removed permanently. Would death now be thrown into literal fire.

As above.

sage:

Stop beign enslaved to demonic teachings and read the bible and stop tryind to say rev 20:8 = hellfire

Again, I never used Rev. 20:8 to indicate your forced presumptions. Your problem seems to have been borne out of misreading posts, and I'm certain now that you follow the same trend in reading the Bible.

It is interesting to note that annihilationists are not even agreed among themselves. Some deny any concept of "fire/burning"; others affirm that there is a literal fire and burning. If your accusations hold, then those annihilationists who affirm a literal fire have been enlsaved to demonic teachings ab initio.

sage:

Go through those scriptures i posted in my other post and try to explain them all away.

'Explaining away' scripture is not my forte and i'll leave that to anyone interested in obliging you your pet wish. In anycase, I could offer you what my persuasions are on those verses, even though your best shot would be to deny them with endless arguments.

sage:

Its a pity he way the devil mires people in false teachings

Would that be taken as applying to your case?

@cute-ass and abdkadir,

An honest mistake - no vex. As written and translated in mine, that was Swedish.
As we would say in Swedish: "hur länge har du bodde i Sverige?" - "how long have you lived in sweden?"

@gbade. x,

gbade. x:

An unrepentant sinner is condemned - not by Jesus but by his Sins!!
. . .
So please change that perspective of The Redeemer being the Condemner!!

Haa!! Glory to God for ever and ever! You've just summed it up for us; and I especially liked the way you put the last line. Thank God for scholars like you.

@lysaa, I just dey. Bless up and enjoy today's worship!!

@Backslider,

Backslider:

Hell is meant for Sinners. Jesus will and is condemning Sinners Simple and short.

My dear bro, that statement needs important qualification and clarification. Even so, it cannot be sustained in God's Word.

I believe that God condemns SIN in all its ramification; but Scripture shows us severally that Jesus was not and is not condemning SINNERS. Let me outline them:

The Woman Taken in the Very Act - John 8.
The religious leaders of the day were mechanically correct in their analysis to stone those caught in the sin of adultery (compare John 8:5 with Lev. 20:21 and Deut. 22:22). But even though the woman stood before Jesus as a sinner, this is what transpired next: "When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more." (verses 10-11).

God Did Not Send His Son for Condemnation - John 3:17
Wicked and sinful was the world into which the Son of God was born. Some of us would have thought that the sins of some people were so grievious that they deserved nothing less than condemnation. But this is what Jesus said: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."

Today, God Seeks To Reach A Lost World - II Cor. 5:19
Imagine sharing the Gospel with someone today, and the first thing he/she hears is: "Jesus IS condemning sinners. Simple and short!" Of course, you most probably never meant to say that; but that's directly opposed to the message of reconciliation that says: "Jesus IS saving sinners. Simple and sweet!" This is the ministry of the NT to which we as Christians should be committed to - and how blessed to read the inspired pen of Paul again: "To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation" (II Cor. 5:19).

Certainly, I remember that the evangelist is never quite done with his/her task until he/she informs the sinner of the aweful judgement of God upon the unrepentant and rebellious. Yet, God sets His love before the sinner as the most important factor in saving us, than anything else.

Cheers.

@sage,

sage:

Shahan you have started your blind arguments again. I posted scriptures that backed up everythinh i said but u didnt bother to look at it

My dear sir, I wonder why you are so quick to be accusative in your posts. Just to assure you, I indeed looked them up, and I'm sorry to note that you have flipped pages without seeking an understanding of what the texts say.

sage:

The bible defined the lake of fire as Death, not everlasting torture

The same Bible described the second death as being cast into "the lake of fire", so graphically that a careful reader will NOT miss the everlasting torment there:

Rev 20:10 & 14-15
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. . . And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

sage:

Eternal fire that never stops burning was used to describe the destruction of Edom, Sodom and other cities.

If you are referring to Jude 7, I beg to differ from those who don't know jot about the context there.

sage:

Jesus went to hell, so did job and other faithfuls. The people in hell are dead not tormented

Since death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:14), I beg you sir, please bring me the verse that says Jesus went to THE LAKE OF FIRE, and argument will cease. As far as I know, Jesus did NOT go to that place prepared for the devil and his angels (". . . into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels" - Matt. 25:41.

sage:

The basis of the christian faith which you claim to have is the resurrestion. The false doctrine of eternal torment contradicts it.

The supposed contradiction is contracted by those who struggle with the plain text of Scripture.

sage:

@Shaahan stop beign enslaved to false teachings perpetrated by demons. the bible is clear on this.

You are yet to demonstrate a clear understanding of the subject; so do you care to stop the shouting for a moment and take a second look, perhaps?

sage:

I'm not suprised though. You fully support the morden day harlotry of the church against the principles of true christianity so this does not come as a suprise.

No, my dear. Long ago I covenanted in my heart to God that small talk and snide remarks will not sway me.

Tara!

@topic,

Let me gather a few points from others:

Kintayo:

Boldness comes with the second fire. . .

Having received the first fire, the disciples were filled again. . . These are hallmarks of fresh fire.

Fresh fire. . . the first fire. . . the second fire. . . the nth fire?? I'm not sure that Scripture speaks of being filled with or receiving 'fire' as indicative of being filled with the Holy Spirit. It is not a question of receiving fire several times.

Bobbyaf:

If a person is possessed they will bear much fruit, and others on the outside will notice the change and will be led to ask about the change.

The Bible does not speak of a Holy-Spirit-filled person as 'possessed'. Check it out for a moment.

Backslider:

The God We should be Seekin is The One that Hates Sin and Sinners

While it is true that God hates sin, I don't think it is correct to say He hates sinners. "But God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom. 5:8). We would have been irrecoverably doomed as sinners if God hated us.

Bobbyaf:

While the Holy Spirit is not fire per se, fire is a fitting symbol of the cleansing work of the Holy Spirit, and that is what the poster was trying to bring accross.

I don't think that was what Kintayo was putting across. The opening post was about power, rather than about cleansing - two different things.

TayoD:

Fire from indication of scripture refers solely to judgement. . .  Asking for Fire is asking for judgement.

. . . and:

babyosisi:

Fire is not only used as judgement as the scripture rightly quoted by backslider says.

While agreeing partly with TayoD as to fire being indicative of judgement, I would rather fully agree with babyosisi that it is not the ONLY thing it represents in Scripture. It is indicative of a number of things including judgement (Gen. 19:24), divine approbation/approval (I Chron. 21:26), and revealed glory (II Chron. 7:3) among others.

As in the last text above (II Chron. 7:3), I believe the "cloven tongues like as of fire" in Acts 2:3 does not indicate judgement or cleansing, but rather glory revealed in power and divine approbation. God was attesting to the glory of His Son Jesus Christ seated at His rigt hand in heaven:

"Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear." (Acts 2:33).

The 'cloven tongues like as of fire' happened once (as far as Scripture shows us); but the power of its message rings throughout the world today: therefore, let everyone know assuredly, that "God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ" (vs. 36).

abdkabir:

@cute-ass
U shoud include the translation. The Norwegian language isn't that popular I'm a Muslim.

It's rather Swedish.

@cute-ass,

Lol, it is such a grace to find people disagree with me in some of my views - and I can be thankful for the added insight you offered.

However, like I said earlier, it all depends on who is defining what; and in what context they are using the defined concepts.

I am persuaded that both humility, strength and weakness are character traits that define people's dispositions. In this sense, humility can be either a weakness or a strength. It all depends on the context in which it is being applied.

A humility that excludes boldness in the face of challenges is rather a weakness than a display of strength. For instance, a kindred word ('meekness') is used to describe Moses in Num. 12:3; and for all that, his boldness to face Pharaoh is a rare commodity among many today. I believe that Moses' humility/meekness was a "strength" rather than a weakness.

On the other hand, when humility is self-seeking and unresponsive, such a disposition is rather a weakness than strength. I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ left us a perfect example of humility in Matt. 11:29. Of course, we read of the boldness that is clearly marked throughout His earthly ministry as He challenged sin, hypocrisy and what today is known as 'political correctness'. For all of that, He was never self-seeking and went out for the good of others.

The point is, humility can be viewed either as a weakness of strength by whoever is using the concept.

Cheers.

@Backslider,

I just have been around, but busy with loads of stuff. Hope you're doing great? Bless you and everyone here.

@topic,

Nothing new. When jocular doubt starts, its lyrics is always "Dem say. . . somebody told me." The common sense thing to have done would be to simply open the Bible to Genesis 4:1 and challenge your "born-again christian" friend. Then you both can continue your argument on that verse - for as long as it takes for the doubt to congeal. Cheers.

When you experience speaking in tongues, you will know the difference between what Paul actually taught, and what people think he taught.

Hell-fire is real and unending. Its various descriptions in Scripture are nothing less than as found in Revelation 20:10 - those who are cast into the lake of fire shall be:

            TORMENTED

            DAY and NIGHT

            FOR EVER and EVER.

Jesus NEVER went to the LAKE of FIRE. He died for the salvation of man - that whosoever believes might NOT perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16.

@syrup,
You've weathered a lot, but intelligently articulated a lot on this subject. Good work - keep it going sista!!

Depends on who is defining what. For some, humility is plain stupidity; to others, it is a very strong virtue.

And the cousin-word 'weakness' has often suffered the same dichotomy of understanding and context. While one may see a weakness as unspiring, perhaps not many people realize that it is the key to greatness - so long as we understand its context:

II Cor. 12:9 - "And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me."

II Cor. 13:4 - "For though He was crucified through weakness, yet He liveth by the power of God. For we also are weak in Him, but we shall live with Him by the power of God toward you."

Heb. 11:34 - "Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens."

Na anoda person tif money; na pastor Chris suffer!

@lysaa, my dearie, how U dey? I've been busy for a while, and haven't forgotten you.

Po Deep:

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit,I think,is d greatest sin.I think it was said in Revelations or so.

MarK 3:29 - "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation."

cute-ass:

@ abdkabir
går det bra med deg?

"går det bra med dej/dig" = rough translation: "Are you alright/Is it well with you?"

@abdkabir - you may be right.

@mrpataki,

No vex - before a.m. tomorrow, your email will have been sent - I promise.
I agree: it wasn't fair of me at all - she only wanted your address to mail your the gift she promised. . . (and a few other things too private for the thread).

Her Yahoo e-addy is now active; but I won't fail to send the belated message.

mlks_baby:

@shahan, you do well. How many days now wey I gee you d message to deliver for me?? No worry, I still get that aussie's phone number - you go soon see pepper!! You better go back home to naija, because I don phone the Aussie embassy not to extend your visa - you're on holiday!!

Yeye wan finish you, bad belle!! Not only the phone number - I even carry the man and him wallet come Naija sef!! Abi you neva hear?? I don tell you before - anybody fit mistake me for Warri girl!!

We go yan later. No fail ya exams O!

@all,

Wetin happen? Shahan carry oyibo man come naija. . . the man get bia-bia. . . e tall so tey. . . haba!

I didn't at any time say that shahan was seeing a vision of ring-and-altar ceremony, abi? When we got to naija, I said plainly that he was my friend - which is not the same thing as fiancee! No objections raised at home. Then why is it so surprising that this one na extra-ordinary?

Anyways, the guy says Naija is beautiful! Too bad I'm not based here; and I'm getting bored with American life. Glad to be back to my ewedu and gbegiri soups; the noise and air pollution; the chaotic traffic; . . . most of all, the Forum. I missed you all, no be small. This is just a short line to let you all know say I just dey, and will resume my space to gist with y'all.


@m4malik,
               !!ffo dehctiws s'enohp ruoy .won smrof eht tog s'ehs ;reh ot klaT

@Y'all,

Abeg make una help me rejoice O - I landed safely for naija and thought to quickly let da house know!

As for the FC-thingy, I've much to say about that, and will return soon again to gist y'all.

By the way, one stubborn aussie follow me come naija O - he say e no go gree whether vision dey or not: na holy force he go take ***** me. E dey quote Matt. 11:12 for me since, and e never let me hear word!

As for that lil sis of mine, na jealousy wan kill am! She no fit concentrate for her lawyer book again since she left Melbourne. I just get premonition say mrpataki go drop me the commission - by hook or crook, even by net or by canoe sef.

Take care for now, and talk 2 y'all L8r.

@lysaa,

lysaa:

I just sent a pos[/b]t and u appear to be the only one that it was amplified to. Thats a gain i have realised. Ty for hearing a childish and cheap talk. Bottomline is u heard.

That's why I feel sorry for your type, because your pretences haven't really helped at all. If you just sent a post, why address it to [b]me - shahan?? Go back and see how many times you addressed your cheap amplified posts to me directly.

lysaa:

Bla bla bla. what do i care about whose mouth u heard those words? No matter how cheap, it's still not free, u paid attention.

I see - you wanted the cheap applause all this while? Why not simply say so and save the day? I always knew you were sporting for a professional busy-body career; and perhaps that's why "it's still not free." Well done.

lysaa:

Now U are right about praying for me and maybe Pastor Chris, who knows. Please do more of the prayers than talking. Thats where a change can be effected. I f u really care. U and I know that I'm not miles wrong so don't fake it for the love of Christ.

First, there's no faking and/or pretences in my posts like have been multiplied in your posts. Love in Christ works in two ways: prayer and talking (II Cor. 5:20). And it is precisely in that way that a change could be effected; not the pride being promoted in your camp with "we don't give a hoot" and "whats your business" attitudes.

lysaa:

Me too, u sound intellegent and grown up but for heaven's sake, u just don't know when to stop talking and the matter is really non of your business. And then telling me to lay off was unreasonably rude of u. I've been low on this matter and what i'd said and would still say is Christians should mind the way they address issues even in an instance where they are right; this applies to other ministries or MOG whether money or no money issue.

For love sake, I apologise for your reading me "unreasonably rude". What I don't take from people (anyone at all for that matter) is foolish talk and the pride that pretends it is reasonable to just be quiet and say nothing when being directly addressed.

I addressed that line to you in just the way you had offered to be rude; and if you missed that, no qualms. The way you guys have been addressing this issue is as if holy scam and fraud in the house of God is okay simply because the MOG is your pastor.

Of course, I would reasonably defend my pastor if I felt his actions were in accord with what I believe the Bible teaches. But certainly not in cases where open fraud is countenanced just because it is our group!

lysaa:

C'mon Shahan, professional busy-body or u just had a glimpse of  your act?

Just aptly describing you, my dear.

lysaa:

OK, u guys have a more sophisticated way of defending. Good for u.

Oh please. Apply it in yours if it helps your case.

lysaa:

I am not defending anything but letting u guys know that the way u are going about the issue isn't right least u incure the wrath of God on u. I say what I say for your own good not mine.

Let me concede in this one thing to you, lysaa. I may be judged wrong, inept, a busy-body, and all sorts in the way that I respond to posts. It is even surprising that for all that, the grace of God on my life endears me to many folks across the globe (including this Australian who is returning to Naija with me and sitting by my side in the plane as I'm typing this - the guy no gree, and he say he wan marry me by 'holy' force, vision or no vison!! ).

Anyway, lysaa. . . I am willing to soften my approach and demand nothing in return, even if I'm many times misunderstood: just so that you and I could promote love and fellowship regardless of who is looting what and offerring it wherever. Agreed?

lysaa:

How do u think God sees things? You think he frowns at financial scam more than he does to lying? I'd really appreciate your e-mail.

Both lying and financial scams are hideous sins in His eyes. But then, pride that refuses to acknowledge wrong is even more hideous - agreed again??

@lysaa,

I'm at the airport trying to catch my flight enroute Europe to Naija, and thought to check on the latest post to waste the few hours before the call to board.

lysaa:

@ shahan

u guys amuse me everyday
your words or anyother's onhere can neither daunt my happiness nor destabilize my personal composure not to talk of me shouting. Saying that i was screaming suggests how loud u heard the words deep in u, meaning u heard me._lol

Talk like this shows how cheap and childish the talker is. In a public forum, decorum is essential, but perhaps that does not list as one of your commodities. I would rather not think you're a stranger to it. What did you gain in typing in all capitals?

lysaa:

One thing for sure is this, U are becoming pathetically predictable and because I say so, u are going to come back here to repeat yourself.

Shows where your thinking is leading you; but I've heard cheap talkers ten-a-penny from your camp who we should feel very sorry for.

lysaa:

That where isn't my problem. we don't give a hoot because u are not the first neither are u going to be the last on this matter. I only bother about your condition, the way u have programmed your mind.

Just for the fun of it, may I oblige you the applause for your programmed mind not giving a "hoot"? The last time I heard that was from a local thief at the Museum here - and his loot was just two nickels for a cigar!

lysaa:

u have successfully convinced yourself that u are doing the right thing, thinking u are on a just course. But is this the extent of your wisdom on this matter? said u are asking a question but anybody could tell what your intention is turning to even tho u didn't start it this way but probably was incited by what others would think of your opinion about pastor chris, I have prayed for u.

I have prayed for you as well; but if you don't mind, could I ask if you're a sophist mind-reader to have taken a shot at guessing what my intentions were, even though you were many miles wrong?

lysaa:

dear shahan, u said to lay off _{(no hard feeling at all)} but let's face facts, are u not the one who is supposed to lay off?, after all, I am the one in the church not u, pastor is my pastor not urs, it wasn't your cash that was involved so whats your business? NOTHING. u want to expose holy scam forming spiritual EFCC? is that a new calling? oh please,  You have a lot to do with your life rather than busybodying 1tim5:13 & 2thess 3: 11. There is so much to talk about, there are souls out there and on here waiting for your voice to bring them to Christ.

I had high hopes that you would be a bit grown up; alas! What's all this drivel about, lysaa? How come this has become an issue between both of us? Did you not say that you were done with this discussion? What brought you back - being a more professional busy-body?? I can leave the thread for you to practise that, if that's your life ambition.

The fact that it is not my money is even happier; and again, my pastor would not be defended in such scam by the cheap, sad methods you guys have been purring over. If you took a guess by drumming up this drivel in hope that your nightmares would somehow be laid to rest, then do the more sensible thing to pray that it doesn't become a trademark of LoveWorld.

lysaa:

by the way, what local assembly do u belong? i really want to know that perfect church. Abeg email me if u do not want people to know. lisajonahses@yahoo.com

No wahala, I'll send you an email about it - if it makes you any happier. Perhaps you might hope to be seeking a big scam that matches this issue - i guarantee you that we have big issues; but not one tied to "offering" from stolen money!

@mrpataki,

mrpataki:

@ Shahan,
Until I recieve the mail from you, I will not go further to state anything here.

No vex naa! Shébi you saw that I was away for a few days - still in consultations with Gehazi. Then I went over to see Samuel as to why Saul wasn't patient before he committed that dangerous presumption.

If you want their answers, oya maza-maza go see Samuel. That sage still has wisdom (but becareful you don't employ the antics of that woman at Endor!) Meanwhile, the committee of prophets have counselled that your email be sent by p.m. tomorrow as I would be on my way to naija by Monday night.

In hindsight, maybe I haven't sent the email because I was a little jealous as mlks_babe has accused. Her Yahoo email has not been active as she has been using her school e-box for her "bukuru" lawyer work! So, I hold ace at the moment and enjoy putting you on high jump! Pay me my commission first, and the vision shall be released!

Cheers.

davidylan:

all these righteous people sef!
Say "i like you marry me" chikena! All these hiding under "Revelations" no go work o!

davidylan:

@ adesodgi
no come and spoil the "annointing" here o.

You sef! Thou oughtest not disclose what thou seest not! The 11th commandment: thou shalt not make the 'gods' in this thread to turn on thee!!

adesodgi:

Revolu what?
ENone that says resolution walks is just a word without work.It wont work.I tell you because your not the first and surely wont be the last.
Peace in, Adesodgi,

Why una mind dey fluctuate like this? Who ever told you guys that we operate by resolution?

Wait - soon thou shalt see what the vision says.

Maybe not - perhaps busy with some other things. It would be interesting to read his/her answers to the answers people ahve asked.

@Pain,

Pain:

Fellow Nairalanders, have you ever stopped to wonder why there are so many attacks against Christianity popping up all over the place?

They just can't stand who Christ is, and what He taught.

@babyosisi,

babyosisi:

why you should take whatever a musli tells you with a grain of salt

http://www.hauns.com/~DCQu4E5g/koran5.html

You just anticpated me! Lol, I was coming to that issue about Al-taqiyya in order to bring mr nuru to level ground.

@nuru,

nuru:

In all the spurious replies, no one has been able to prove that the women referenced in the Hadith were raped. Rather you have shown how generous the Muslim captors could be to their maids.

If one were auditioning for a comedy stand-up comic, you would win - hands down. Did you realise the joker you were in referring to the murder and lewd sex of Muhammad's companions as a matter of "how generous" the Muslim captors were? They took captives to rounds of sexcoitus interruptus after having pillaged their villages and settlements, killed their families, and subjected them to mental and physical trauma - and you call that "generous"??

Thankfully, not many muslims are as comical.

nuru:

Remember that was a society where girl-children used to be buried alive. If Islam could start the reorientation of the people towards dealing justly and treating with dignity not just the free women, but captive maids, I wonder what moral right anybody has to label those who propagated Islam as rapists. You have to look at the historical perspective without prejudice and concede at least that the emergence of Islam emancipated the world.

What a laugh. The emergence of Islam "emancipated" which world - the fictional utopia in your dream? The so-called "emancipation" is evident in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and a host of the "world" where Islam has been entrenched centuries after its emergence.

A muslimah (or, morchidat) on the forum has posited that "Islam is changing" (mukina2, 2nd to the last paragrapgh). We know it evidently is changing - because nothing has improved since the emergence of the "religion of peace" that has been so "generous" to divide women for coitus interruptus after killing their husbands. That is a 21st century definition of nuru's "emancipation!" Any more??

***shakes head is bewilderment, muttering the words 'emancipation' and 'generous'

@donnie,
please help us ask am well-well.

@bari_kade,
wey you now? I'm enjoying your treatise on the Sabbath, and hope you find time to come give us the sequel as promised.

@babyosisi,
'grace' for some people is a strange phenomenon; for such, 'law' proves everything, even though they don't understand what it points to in the first place.

@babs787,

babs787:

Before posting my comment, I will want you to post your listed problems in another thread so that:

1. Babs will be able to diagnosis them for you.

2. there will be no diversion from the main topic.

Note: Your questions will lead us to the origin and authors of the bible, very interesting!

I will hold on till I hear from you based on my earlier rejoinder before posting my comment to the answers supplied by you to my second set of questions.

Now, would you be kind as to address the questions I offered earlier as borrowed from 4get_me? Here again:

For those accusing the Bible of having been corrupted (according to the Qur'an), I have a few questions:

#1. what did the original Bible say in John 1:1, Psalm 2:12, and Isaiah 9:6 before Muhammad was born?

#2. who exactly "corrupted" the verses in John 1:1, Psalm 2:12, and Isaiah 9:6 according to Muhammad's accusation?

#3. In what year exactly were John 1:1, Psalm 2:12, and Isaiah 9:6 'corrupted' as accused by Muhammad against the Bible?

#4. What "Psalms" did Muhammad refer to when he stated in the Qur'an that Allah gave the Psalms unto David [Sura 4:163 - ". . and to David We gave the Psalms."]? What exactly did the Psalms say, and how many chapters were they?

#5. Why did Muhammad not mention Isaiah in the Qur'an as one of the prophets of God, even though the Jews recognized him as such, and Jesus quoted from the same Isaiah?

If Muslims have investigated Muhammad's accusations and found them untenable, would they be willing to admit that Muhammad was not telling the truth?

The reason why you should deal with them here is to settle this rascally attitude of yours in often advancing eristic denials of biblical tenets simply because Muhammad made those denials.

babs787:

"Mo wi ire abi mi o wi re"[/b] - [b]"Have I spoken well?"[i][/i]

E kàre, ìjòyè àlàyé. E wi ire! 

@babs787,

babs787:

Thanks again for the response. I will to bring some verses into your limelight from your last post to show that he didnt die on the cross before proceeding to the next evidence.

It doesn't appear you are scoring any points so far in your far-fetched denials. The Bible conclusively declares the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in both the Old and New Testaments; and it is only on the basis of Muhammad's arab testament that you have been sweating to "prove/show" what the Qur'an denies.

babs787:

1.[/b] You showed some verses saying that Judas betrayed jesus with a kiss, abi?
- - -
Now read this too showing that judas never betrayed jesus with a kiss, rather jesus showed himself

Your problem is that you're pretending the Gospels never indicated the token of a kiss that Judas used in his betrayal; whereas in fact they state it so.

Even in John's Gospel, Judas was not with the disciples when the betrayal took place; but rather was standing with the band he led to arrest Jesus (John 18:3 & 5); and the same John's Gospel recorded that Judas betrayed Jesus (vs.5).

The kiss was only a sign/token that Judas gave to the band he led to arrest Jesus (Matt. 26:48 and Mark 14:44); but the betrayal itself had occured from the moment that Judas "went unto the chief priests" (Mark 14:10). The synoptic Gospels that recorded the token of the kiss were to emphasize how heinous the betrayal was - "Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful" (Prov. 27:6). Though pretending to be an affectionate friend, Judas proved himself an enemy.

John's narrative emphasized the deity of Jesus (John 18:6 ~ "As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground" - cf. Psa.27:2); so that even in spite of the cruelty of Judas' betrayal, the Son of God willingly gave Himself to them (John 18:8 - compare with Matt. 26:53-54 and Mark 14:49).

If your argument is based solely on the kiss you did not see in John, does that make Judas any less the traitor who betrayed Jesus? The synoptic Gospels all record Judas as having betrayed Jesus (Matt.10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 22:4); and even in John's Gospel, Judas is also definitely identified as the one who betrayed Him (John 6:71 & 18:2). Not only so, Judas was also called a thief (John 12:6) and a traitor (Luke 6:16).

babs787:

Your post regarding the above
The disciples were there and saw Judas kiss Jesus as a sign of betrayal. Your linear thinking prevents you from seeing that.

Madam, can you bring out the verse from John 18v4-8 that says Judas kissed jesus and we see whose linear thinking has really prevented from seeing?

As above, I just demonstrated that the disciples saw Judas kiss Jesus as a sign of the betrayal as is recorded in the synoptic Gospels (Matt. 26:48 and Mark 14:44). Pretending to hold on to John 18 alone in disregard of the other accounts explains your linear thinking.

babs787:

What do you have to say to the above? Do we agree that Judas betrayed jesus with a kiss or that Jesus showed himself?

Both.

babs787:

Lets see whose linear thinking is at work
So how do a person that hanged himself fell headlong?

Headlong means falling with head first.

Again, your linear thinking. "He hanged himself" tells what happened; "he fell headlong" explains how it happened.

There are cases where people attempt suicide by trying to hang themselves on a tree. They tie the rope to a high branch, wear the noose around their necks, and jump off the branch they climbed onto. In falling, the rope snaps the chord of their neck and throat - thus causing death within a few minutes. If in some instances the rope breaks, then the person falls to the ground instead of being suspended mid-air.

babs787:

Do they hang someone upside down?

Do they hang someone on a flat ground?

Just to quiz your amusement, read a news report of Pakistan President, Musharraf who defied death more than once by hanging upside down.

Excerpt: "He first avoided death as a teenager in 1961 when he was hanging upside down from the branch of a mango tree and it broke, he writes in the prologue of his autobiography, "In the Line of Fire," released Monday in New York."

babs787:

Did you see the word "Now this man bought a field with the reward of his wickedness'.? Meaning that Judas bought the field with his body.

Have you read what I wrote or you simply refuse your understanding to yield fruit? Do you understand Jewish customs at all? Let me use another example about the transfer of transactions. In Heb. 7:9-10, we read that Levi paid tithes even though he was not yet born at the time it occured. Jewish custom explains it simply that Abraham's paying tithe to Melchizedek on behalf of Levi meant that the tithes paid was recorded against the latter's name. Any Jew reading it will have no problem understanding the nature of the transaction. Levi was said to have paid tithes even though he was not as yet born - because the tithes paid by Abraham on his behalf was recorded against his name: Levi.

So it was when the chief priests "took counsel" and bought the field with Judas' blood money (Matt.27:7). The name on the receipt would bear none other than Judas' - and that is why there was no contradiction in Acts 1:18 in stating that "this man purchased a field". The text emphasized Judas' sordid deed, rather than the actions of the chief priests.

It is because you do not understand Jewish customs and have not bothered to study them, that is why you often want to judge the Bible by arab/Quraish traditions.

babs787:

I will comment on your response in my next post.

Look forward to your comments.

babs787:

Stay blessed.

You too, and cheers!

@mukina2,

You just can't help yourself referring to me as "shaitan", abi? Islam really is a sweet religion.

mukina2:

to them women in Islam shouldnt be seen or heard .not necessarily all shaitan you saw me type out some

That's why I asked for the basis of your persuasion otherwise - is it a mere opinion you were expressing because you feel Islam as a "changing" religion?

mukina2:

i wish i could really reply this statement but i can't . _{and i hope you dnt ask why}all i can say is that most people use sharia as a front .extremist are all over .even in relatively small and peaceful countries _{enough now}

If as you now admit, "extremists are all over", then the world must be in trouble! And that is why we keep asking you and your colleagues three sets of small questions:

                 #why these extremists exist;
                 #what is responsible for breeding these extremists; and
                 #where is the PEACE that these extremist religion always preaches?

mukina2:

shaitan i didnt say all . i said women do participate in activities in the mosque

Did you miss what I said earlier? "This does not pass in the majority of cases" - does that sound like "all" to you?

mukina2:

The Muslim woman is accorded full spiritual and intellectual equality with man, and is encouraged to practice her religion and develop her intellectual faculties throughout her life. In her relations with men both are to observe modesty of behavior and dress and a strict code of morality which discourages unnecessary mixing of the sexes.

Open your eyes to reality and not replay what you've been spoon-fed by the oustass/imam/mullah. For now, I'll save you the headache of going through the Qur'an and Hadiths for this fictitious "full spiritual and intellectual equality" between the sexes in Islam.

mukina2:

Nafisa a descendant of 'Ali who was such a great authority on hadith that Imam al-Shafi'I sat in her circle in al-Fustat when he was at the height of this fame; and Shaikha Shuhda who lectured publicly in one of the principal mosques of Baghdad to large audiences on literature, rhetoric and poetry, and was one of the foremost scholars of Islam.

The same great authorities on the Hadith that Muslims disgaree as to which is authentic and which is misquoted?

mukina2:

There is therefore every encouragement for a Muslim woman to pursue studies in any field for her intellectual benefit and to make use of her academic or professional training for the good of the community, subject to certain moral precepts which will be dealt with later in this paper.

There is always a catch somewhere ~ "subject to certain" conditions. It is precisely at this point that there exists a gulf between what is theory and what is reality. High-sounding verbiage does not often translate into reality in the Islamic world; and this is precisely why observers are watching the drama with keen interest in the countries listed earlier.

mukina2:

madam .islam in indeed changing .i repeat  and also one of the most famous mystics in Islam, Rabi'a al 'Adawiyya, was a woman.

Now, that is quaint. You may feel that Islam is "changing"; but that leaves so many more questions unanswered. Isn't it said that Allah has perfected the religion of Islam? So, where does the "change" come in - from what to what??

And that subject many Muslims are not conveniently able to mention - the mystical part of Islam! That would b subject for another thread.

mukina2:

its just that the extremist try to make it hard for us . .they are all over madam

Okay, I'll not be tedious to you on that.

mukina2:

i hope you will be around when the role of women in Islam will be discussed

Look forward to it. And thanks again.

Now, get on with the original exercise and don't take any notice of us for the meantime. Muslims are waiting for some more enjoyable input from you. Cheers.

@topic,

Anyone falling for James Bonwick's tales has enough time to be amused. The one thing that readers should note is that such story-tellers are never sure of their tales, and use lots of conjectures to fill the gaps in order to appeal to readers.

Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri on December 25th in a cave/manger with his birth being announced by a star in the East and attended by three wise men.

1. Which was it - cave or manger?? The author is not sure: and readers should note that they are not the same.

2. The Bible did not mention the number of wise men who sought and found Christ at birth - it simply said "wise men" (Matt. 2:1, 7 & 16).

His earthly father was named "Seb" ("Joseph". Seb is also known as "Geb": "As Horus the Elder he, was believed to be the son of Geb and Nut." Lewis Spence, Ancient Egyptian Myths and Legends, 84.

1. How did Lewis Spence come about the transliteration of "Seb" and "Geb" to mean "Joseph"? Was the name "Joseph" known as an ethnic Egyptian name?

2. What is the meaning of "Nut" and how does that figure represent a second "father" to the "Horus the Elder"?

At age 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized, having disappeared for 18 years.

1. What evidence exists for this conjecture?

He performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised El-Azarus ("El-Osiris", from the dead.

1. What languages are the names "El-Azarus" and "El-Osiris"? These chaps are really playing cheap by inter-weaving languages to arrive at their theories, just to suit their agenda.

He delivered a "Sermon on the Mount" and his followers recounted the "Sayings of Iusa."
Horus was transfigured on the Mount.

What evidence for this conjecture?

He was crucified between two thieves, buried for three days in a tomb, and resurrected.

Evidence for the conjecture?

He was also the "Way, the Truth, the Light," "Messiah," "God's Anointed Son," the "Son of Man," the "Good Shepherd," the "Lamb of God," the "Word made flesh," the "Word of Truth," etc.

Intellectual dishonesty. This is why these theorists are regarded as busy-bodies with nothing more than intellectual excreta. Here we are served a theory that Horus was a "He", and a "Son of Man"; whereas another theorist offers that ~~

Jen33:

Horus himself was a mythological character. The Egyptians never believed Horus was a real man. He was a 'saviour god'.

Them do well.

He was "the Fisher" and was associated with the Fish ("Ichthys", Lamb and Lion.
He came to fulfill the Law.

1. Jesus was rather a Carpenter, and not a "fisher" (Mark 6:3); so these theorists goofed in their desperate effort to tessellate their tales with the Biblical Jesus.

2. What "Law" did horus come to fulfill?

Horus was called "the KRST," or "Anointed One."
Like Jesus, "Horus was supposed to reign one thousand years."

1. Again, "the KRST" is another desperate fabrication as these theorists did not tell us what language or document they were translating their ideas from.

2. "Like Jesus" - at last, any reader should see that the aim of these new-age theorists is simply to make everything look and sound and feel "like Jesus", even if they have to do so by dishonest conjectures.

3. The Bible does not limit the reign of Christ to a thousand years. Rather, the one thousand years of Christ's reign is during the time when Satan also shall be bound (Rev. 20:2-4). The saints shall reign together with Christ for that one thousand years (vs. 4 & 6).

However, after the one thousand years, the Bible emphatically declares that Christ's rule is forever ~~ ". . . The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever" (Rev. 11:15); and the saints also shall reign with Him forever ~~ "And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever" (Rev. 22:5).

Furthermore, inscribed about 3,500 years ago on the walls of the Temple at Luxor were images of the Annunciation, Immaculate Conception, Birth and Adoration of Horus, with Thoth announcing to the Virgin Isis that she will conceive Horus; with Kneph, the "Holy Ghost," impregnating the virgin; and with the infant being attended by three kings, or magi, bearing gifts. In addition, in the catacombs at Rome are pictures of the baby Horus being held by the virgin mother Isis--the original "Madonna and Child."

Does anyone know what language the word "kneph" is derived from, and how it translates into "Holy Ghost"? Did ancient Egyptian mythology develop a notion of the "Holy Ghost" 3,500 years ago, or these theorists are applying some sleight of hand to sell their tales? Neither does the Bible indicate that the number of the wise men was "three".

On the whole, my faith remains firm in Jesus Christ. When one subjects these theories to the same test by which they test the Christian faith, again and again James Bonwick and Lewis Spencer's theories fail their own test.

@mrpataki,

mrpataki:

Now the same Leviticus 18:19 -Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her unclothedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.

Blabs787, which version of the bible did you bring out that scripture.

This is what babs787 quoted:

babs787:

Leviticus 18v19: Do not have intercourse with a woman during her monthly period (menstruation) because she is ritually unclean.

Actually, he quoted from the Good News Bible version (GNB) (the word 'menstruation' is his own, but it applies in just the same sense).

@babyosisi,

You go soon spoil vision for us O!

babyosisi:

again,who is eyeing who?
Is it Mr pataki and shahan or goodguy and mlks baby.

I will leave that one for the prophets!

babyosisi:

where does mallam bellotti fit in.

The part of the e-kiss!

babyosisi:

Then Ope omi,what is his own?

Toll-gate observer!

babyosisi:

fill me in

There for now!

@mukina2,

mukina2:

mensturation has everything to do with a woman when it concerns masjids .
a mesturating girl/woman does not enter a masjid .does not pray until its over and she has taken a complete bath .
you see its just that some extremist makes it all sound bad but even sharia law permits that a man and women can pray together

Two things here: (a) By intimating that some extremists make it all sound bad, are you assuming that those in authority who do not permit female clerics to preach and lead prayers are extremists in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon like in Pakistan and Afghanistan? (b) By intimating that the Sharia law permits both sexes to pray together, are you thereby denegrading those in the afore-mentioned countries with established sharia laws who do not so permit them? What is the basis of your persuasion - the opinions you learned from others, or the established fact in the Qur'an?

mukina2:

all those countries you mentioned are sharia governed and are full of extremists .

Now that is a very queer statement to make, especially coming from you as an aspiring morchidat. Which exactly confirms the point people have been enquiring from you guys. If it applies that a country being sharia-governed makes it "full of extremists", then all the more nobody wants sharia for the simple reason that we are all fighting extremists! Then I take it that all those countries mentioned earlier are extremists breeding grounds - because governed by Sharia Laws (according to you)!

mukina2:

women are allowed to participate in religious activies .like for example during ramamdan .before the breakinf of fast .there's this haja maimouna that recites the Holy Quran  at the central mosque whichd is aired live on tv .she also preaches in the mosque

This does not pass in the majority of cases. Besides, she would never take the place of a leader in prayers (an imam) - which is what is exclusively reserved for Muslim men. So, you hint earlier that women are permitted to participate in all activities in the mosques is simply a joke.

mukina2:

In morrocco women are allowed to preach .yemen too
very soon other countries will emulate that .saudi  and others will try that too we shall see .

You will note that the case of the morchidats (female religious guides) in Morocco is simply a political issue than it is an Islamic tenet from the Qur'an. The authorities in Morocco permit such cases of morchidats in order to promote moderate Islam in the face of Islamic extremism. That is why you will not find the same case operative in Saudi Arabia, Iran or Iraq.

mukina2:

as for the countries you listed because of  extremists .women are now being given  a chance in islam .

Please mukina2, for once try and be realistic. Those countries listed do not have a case of women being "given a chance!" That is why I asked you about them.

mukina2:

before youfgo there i am not living in sharia and have never lived in a sharia governed country .but i know that sharia does not place a ban on women its the extremists that do .to them women are just secondary people .waiting in the back
Islam is changing .

Again, I beg you to come back and strike off that last line - do not let other Muslims read that joke that "Islam is changing" and then come rushing with accusations that extremists are doing a bad job. As far as I am aware, no true Muslim ever says that "Islam is changing." Probably, it is because you do not live in a Sharia-governed state that you are saying these things. You cannot blame sharia for the existence of extremists, and then come back praising the same sharia!

mukina2:

anyways we are going off-topic here . .i dnt want the vultures to come here . .
because they will turn this whole thread into something else . .

Aight. I'll respectfully leave you to carry on. I must commend you for offering this opportunity to promote dialogue and exchange among Muslims; and please do excuse my visiting this thread with queries to balance the misconceptions.

Tara!