@mukina2,

Let me explain a few things to you - Muslims being illiterate or not.

All this would have been saved if you stated from the onset that you intended it as a joke. But no - you went on from there to 'sarcasm.' I was curious, and asked further, ready to let it end there, and that's why a smile at the end of that reply - see it again:

syrup:

Relax, you don't need to feel suddenly defensive if you "always do this to david" - I know you always do. I only just wondered on the hate and sarcasm you saw that no one else saw.

Next you did was reply with insults - was that necessary? See again:

mukina2:

well keep wondering .maybe if you really read well you will see it .sabi sabi

If you don't like responses the way you were served, why start what you can't finish? Why is it that Muslims are too quick to start issues like this and then turn round to accuse Christians of "self-righteous" and showing how intelligent we are (as if it was anyone's fault you haven't been able to match that)?

Okay, you meant it as a joke. Granted. QED. If it does not suffice and you must address people as you wish to be served, all your choice.

Cheers.

mukina2:

madam this was why i told david to stop hatin .it wasnt anything serious .you made it into something else .

Mukina2, I didn't make it into something else. You know how you addressed my first post; and though I didn't see anything wrong with it, the next thing was you come back with stuff.

@mukina2,

mukina2:

since you are so literate .why must you even waste your time trying to talk to an illiterate . .

why not post your entire cv  on your profile .so we'll all be impressed

I guess that's one more confirmation of what I said earlier.

I wonder why it is that you can't hold a simple dialogue with other discussants without starting out the way you did. If I missed something, all that could have been saved by your pointing it out. Was that too hard to do before you started on something else?

I didn't try to insult another's religion. I wonder what the over-reaction on her part was on a simple question I asked.

@mukina2,

I read the thread well, and please try not confirming that Muslims are illiterates - I've met too many already.

mukina2:

whats your problem .

i always do this to david .so i dnt really understand where you come in .
i am not in the mood for anything .
if you want to pick on someone .look elsewhere

Relax, you don't need to feel suddenly defensive if you "always do this to david" - I know you always do. I only just wondered on the hate and sarcasm you saw that no one else saw.

mukina2:

i dnt know if you're his lawyer . .

i was referrin to his sarcasm

satisfied now

First, it was hate - and you couldn't provide an answer. Now it is sarcasm. So, what sarcasm was in his post thereto?

mukina2:

and where do you come in?

I'm not aware you stand at the toll-gate of this thread.

My question again:

syrup:

What is the hate expressed in his query?

@abdkabir,

abdkabir:

@Syrup, I guess we've met @Bounties of Jannat. Simply put, i admire your use of English.Seems Fantastic.Seriously .

Nonetheless, you're picking on islam without due consideration of the social,political,cultural, context!!!. 4 God sake, if slay was used in Quran, was it not proscribed for war? @ least ISlam touches all aspects of our lives, from d goods ones to d undesirable ones(war etc).

First, I admire your calm regardless of being at the receiving end. I understand how it feels to be in such a position; but then your resolve is applaudable.

Second, when I discuss issues with Muslims, it's often my position to have considered a whole range of issues before posting my persuasions. If SLAY was used in the Qur'an, I wonder who is at war with Muslims before they go on rampage at every excuse, especially when they are convinced that the Qur'an stipulates their actions?

Understandably, most Muslims (particularly in the West) are not as belligerent as we see in other Islam-dominated countries. One could only infer that they do not necessarily agree with Muhammad's injunction to pursue war in the name of promoting Islam.

All the same, the concerns and questions surrounding the violent nature of Islam as a worldview are growing by the day.

abdkabir:

As for the intellectuals u claim are beginning to confess, oh my God 4 d love of God , my answer would be, some people's position needn't necesarily be the true position of Islam.

That's true. But I'll rather save us the headache of reviewing what is "the true position of Islam".

@davidylan,

davidylan:


Dear old Muki! My very own Muki!

Lol. . . I hope you won't put yourself on their mulas hit-list!


@mukina2,

mukina2:

why must you always hate

What is the hate expressed in his query?

@Katigurl,

Why are you so disaffected? Could you share your own SIMPLE understanding of what the Bible teaches on the subject?

@jagunlabi,

I knew you couldn't hold yourself and predictably fell into your own noose in the fumbled idea that you might throw an invective.

jagunlabi:

This world was created with diversity on all levels well embedded in it,by GOD.

I had wanted to ask what "GOD" you were noising on the Forum in your statement above; and here is how you anticpated that question:

syrup:

He doesn't really need a paradigm shift, as he has often been neither here nor there.

jagunlabi:

And so is God.

There is your own version of "GOD" - the one you have often been shifting here and there. Trying to slur the beliefs of others when you don't even have a ground to stand on is the reason for your desperation.

mrpataki:

So to you, this is about a Religion Shift! You need a Paradigm Spiritual Shift Man!

He doesn't really need a paradigm shift, as he has often been neither here nor there.

@mrpataki,

mrpataki:

Thanks a lot once again and God Bless you. You have truly inspired me with your articulate posts on several topics here.

I should rather be thankful that yours have equally challenged and inspired me. One such example is the way you addressed this issue in the following lines:

mrpataki:

However the question here initially was: Hell-fire A Twisted Truth Untangled.

Hell and eternal punishment poser came on later, which I feel can best be answered when we truly define the meaning of Salvation as well the death of Jesus on the cross. Only then can eternal punishment and hell can be fully understood.

I quite agree with you on that and can't improve on your cogent summation. Just to add that issues like this will be all-inclusive in every aspect as the discussion progresses. Perhaps, one other way of looking at it would be: what if Jesus never went to the Cross for our redemption?

Blessings again, and any input would be most appreciated.

@Nella,

Nella:

at leats some one uses her brain here!!

@buluti, u said i still havent't answerd your question, but it just seems 2 me that u haven't been reading nor understanding any thing i ve been writing ( bcuz if u have then by now u would know how 2 tell a fake speaking in toungues apart 4rom a real one!!). well i will explain againn!!

I'm judging u guys that claim 2 speak in toungues 4rom what i have seen of u!! i don't care if u speak in toungues in your closet or in your bathroom or just where ever!! if u guys n your Church claim 2 really speak in toungues, n if u claim that it is realy of God, then y don't u do it according to the principles of d Holy bible?!?!?!?!

2 your question: I say it is fake bcuz like i said above u claim 2 speak in toungues n also that it is from God, but yet u don't do it according to the principles n teachins of d Bible! , 4 Paul in d Bible has showed u n pointed out 2 u clearly some things which you're JUST not 2 do if u speak in toungues, n if u claim 2 speak in toungues n that it is 4rom God, u will obviously respect n go by this principles!! but if not,,,,,,,,,,,,well then your so called " Speaking in toungues is not of God"!!!! = it's fake!

well u mentioned that it is not when you're in Church that u realy speak in toungues right?? but yet u do speak in toungues( d fake one of course) while in d Church don't u!??!?!? n d ones i ve seen was quite more than five min!!
i go back 2 my point again, which is if u guys claim 2 speak in toungues, y don't u do it according 2 how d Bibles teaches u to ?
( i direct my statements mostly 2 your Churches, bcuz d ones i ve seen r in d Churches)
4 d bible stated out CLEARLY 2 u n your Church telling u that if ye come 2gether n ye all believe, then there is no need 4 you to speak in toungues!!
( which annoys me bcuz ye all claim 2 believe, n 2 also speak in toungues, but u never do, practicly nuthing according to the teachings of d Bible!) 4 if u guys n your Church realy speak in toungues as u claim 2 do, then u would absolutely do it according to the teachins of d Holy Bible!! but as u don't do this, well then i simply consider u all FAKERS!!!

D most annoying part is when in a church u all just start talking n blabing out some rubbish n shouting ontop of your voices!!!! CLAIMING 2 SPEAK IN TOUNGUES!!! NON-SENSE!!!

23: " If there the whole Church be come together into one place, and all speak in toungues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelivers, will they not say that ye are mad? "
if u guys realy claim 2 speak in toungues then y do u never look at this teaching 4 Paul during his time on Earth laid it out plain n clearly to the future people who may recive this gift of Speaking in toungues, telling n teaching em what n what not 2 do if u speak in toungues, if u guys realy speak in toungues then u would follow this teachings, n not go doing things your own way!!!

well @ Buluti, do u understand now y i consider u guys fake Speaker?!?!?
U guys simply don't do it as d Bible tells you to!! once again: 4 Paul during his time on Earth laid it out plain n clearly to the future people who may recive this gift of Speaking in toungues, telling n teaching em what n what not 2 do if u speak in toungues, if u guys realy speak in toungues then u would follow this teachings, n not go doing things your own way!!

If you really understand what the Bible says about the gift of tongues and other gifts of the Spirit, why are you so bitter and sarcastic? Why is it that those who don't speak in tongues are the very ones who are quick to display such antagonism over issues they don't understand?

Could you please take another look at verses 2 and 39 and share on what you understand in those verses:

Verse 2: "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

Verse 39: "Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues."

While you're on those, could I ask if you speak in tongues, or how your local church manifests the gift of tongues?

Thanks.

@Katigurl,

Katigurl:

Shere my OWN understanding well i seriously can't waist my time arguing things as obvious as this!!!!
. . .
i don't believe in all those rubish!!! it freaks me out!

Perhaps you just made my point. You may not believe in what God gives as stated in His Word, but it is not "rubbish" as you supposed.

Hi @mrpataki,

Thanks.

I do appreciate every other post on this crucial subject, including yours and 4get_me's. I trust TV01 has helped to bring the discussion a bit up-to-date with his questions as well.

mrpataki:

As to the topic, If hell does not exist, and there is no hell fire, there is no point for Jesus Christ to come into the world to die for mankind

I was going to expand a lil bit on that as well. Perhaps, the argument is not so much a denial as to the existence and reality of hell (seems most discussants agree there is a hell afterall). However, the core issue seems more about what is meant by hell and eternal punishment.

If hell was just a matter of insignificant theology, why would God have allowed His Son to suffer such aweful judgement on the Cross on our behalf?

@Katigurl,

Katigurl:

Speaking in toungues, lies!!! i don't believe nuthing of it! big lies!
do u guys even know what speaking in toungues is
fakers! liers!!

Just some questions for you:

#1. Why is it that those who don't believe in the gift of tongues are very quick to condemn others and use such language as you did??

#2. Whatever you believe or don't believe about the gift of tongues, could you please share your own understanding instead of condemning others?

Thanks.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

The expression forever and ever doesn't mean as Syrup thinks, an indefinite period. The expression means from one period to another, from one age to the next. As a matter of fact the expression has been used in other sections of scripture to refer to the living doing something, yet those people are dead and gone.

As regards the expression "for ever and ever", please consider these other scripture verses where they appear:

#1. He who lives for ever and ever ~~
"And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever." (Rev. 5:14); "And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer" (Rev. 10:6)

#2. God, who lives for ever and ever ~~
"And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever." (Rev. 15:7)

#3. "The LORD shall reign for ever and ever." (Exo. 15:18)

#4. "Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, LORD God of Israel our father, for ever and ever." (1 Chron. 29:10)

#5. "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre." (Psa. 45:6)

#6. "I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations: therefore shall the people praise thee for ever and ever." (Psa. 45:17)

#7. "Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his" (Dan. 2:20)

#8. "But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever." (Dan. 7:18)

Since you are convinced that "The expression forever and ever doesn't mean as Syrup thinks, an indefinite period", then I guess that these scriptures do not not at all mean what they say. In your own view, if the expression doesn't mean what it does, then perhaps, just perhaps, your theology denies that "God lives for ever and ever" and "He shall reign for ever and ever".

At the moment, I just want to point out the meaning of the expression "for ever and ever" within the context of the verses where they appear. What it does mean as applied in Rev. 20:10 is apparent in its context there - they "shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

@Nella,

Nella:

@ buluti: NO!! what was spoken of in d scripture was not " Praying in toungues!!!" it was "SIMPLY" SPEAKING IN TOUNGUES!!! ( can u even read? do u mind NOT inventing your own Bible here?!?!!!?!?!

There is praying in tongues, and the Bible categorically states it so: I Cor. 14:14 ~ "For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful."

Nella:

@Syrup, u say u speak in toungues lite?? do u even know d meaning of d things u say? ( i bet not!!) just keep deciving your self!!!

I'll ignore the castigation for now and seek that you try to make sense in your discussions. I have no problems with anyone who doesn't speak in tongues; but I wonder why non-tongues speakers are the ones who are quick to castigate others.

Nonetheless, I have offered severally the verse some of you often miss out - by commission or ommission:

I Cor. 14:2 ~ "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

Condemning people for speaking divine mysteries in the Spirit is not a healthy position. However, if you choose to continue such accusations and condemnation, I can't hold you back - the Lord knows just how to deal with such.


@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

Leave her to her own confusion. She knows not what awaits her.

Since you're nursing your confused bruises, you're not my judge.

@TV01,

TV01:

Okay. It could be read as meaning the three only. The devil, the beast and the false prophet.

I'm not so sure that it could be read as meaning only the three (the devil, the beast and the false prophet). And here's why:

Verse 15 ~ "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

TV01:

I'd really appreciate if you could buttress the concept of eternal torment for all the wicked with other scriptural references (if indeed you feel this is the case).

I'll try and come back with more; but for the moment I'd say that Rev. 20:15 as above would be convincing enough.

TV01:

I also note verse 14 which reads; "and death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death"

This would suggest that death, hell and the lake of fire are all seperate? Could anyone give an in-depth explanation here?

True, and the reasons for this would follow in subsequent posts. For now I would offer briefly that the Lord Jesus used 'hell' (as appears in our English Bibles) as an umbrella term for the eternal abode for the wicked dead.

Hi @TV01,

TV01:

Hi Syrup,

Pray go easy on Bobbyaf 0! We all take a few licks, and sometimes Bobby is really under fire .

As long as he behaves himself when discussing issues with people, he will find me a pleasant discussant on any thread. Besides, I don't pretend knowledge that I don't have, and that is why I hinted earlier that we are all susceptible to a few slips here and there: see -

syrup:

Well, it is human to be misread - and I've made a few as well. Look forward to your inputs.

TV01:

syrup link=topic=42512.msg924064#msg924064 date=1172661234:

The Bible actually teaches that there is a literal place of eternal punishment for the wicked dead; and this is described in various appellations throughout Scripture.

So Syrup my sister, do you still hold to this?

I haven't changed my views on that as long as Rev. 20:10 remains unchanged: "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."

Many blessings.

@gbade. x,

gbade. x:

Lol, blabs787 is definitely going to find a way to evade these questions. That dude gat mo' skills than jewellery thieves.

You just landed me in trouble by making me laugh out so loud that my family thought ^^****!!

Nella:

" islam is not a religion of peace!" ( i didn't say that, some muslim guy on CNN said it, on one of those debations about islam)

More and more intellectual Muslims are beginning to confess that Islam is not a religion of peace; and they speak thereto as a matter of its tenet rather than as one of recent events.

Islam is not the only religion that has been criticized. So many other religions have been slandered and blasphemed, and there have been bebates and dialogue to resolve issues rather than promote rancour. Admittedly, the slanders have not been abated by these efforts; yet people can move about their normal lives inspite of the unhappy situation.

However, a different response greets the situation when it comes to Islam. Just imagine for a few moments the reaction expressed by the following "peaceful" words: SLAY, BEHEAD, DEMOLITION, BUTCHER, ANNIHILATE, MASSACRE, EXTERMINATE. . . etc. Not to mention that Muslims who find such vocabulary expressive of "peace" are infact following the established doctrines of Muhammad in the Qur'an and the Hadith.

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

Do you feel better now that you have released all that bitterness? I love you too.

Did you feel any better after your unbridled pride and slobber accusations had waned? Only people with such cultic pride read bitterness in others, and how wrong you were to think I was bitter.

You simply can't make such derogatory remarks about people of whom you know nothing, simply because they see issues from a different persuasion from yours; and then you turn round to offer a tattered white flag after they put you through and expose your superbia.

Bobbyaf:

Well said! Thank God someone sees the more important impact of bearing fruits from God's Spirit than trying to force a gift on someone to whom the Holy Spirit hasn't given utterance. The all-should-speak-in-tongues advocates don't seem to recall what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 12 and 13 when he rhetorically asked the following in verse 29 and onwards

A balanced view of God's Word does not suppose that a gift could be forced on anyone - and I've made that quite clear once and again. Besides, if the topic of this thread was about bearing spiritual fruit, then I would have branched off dealing with that instead of the present topic.

Bobbyaf:

As for the question as to whether all should speak in tongues is conviniently overlooked by those pushing the tongue agenda.

When you refer to people as "pushing" the tongue agenda, you reveal your antagonism against the gift of tongues. The point has been made earlier that one should rather be focused on the Biblical understanding of the experience of glossolalia, and not what people have turned it into.

Bobbyaf:

They fail to realize that the most important gift, as well as fruitage from God's Spirit is love. So in order to go around the simple expressions they fill your head with allsorts of interpretations, that only contradict what the very same bible teaches.

I hope you realise that you've classically described yourself? Well done.

Bobbyaf:

When someone in this day and age speaks in tongues, does he or she understand what he or she is saying? Do others around understand? Is not this what Paul is concerned about in the first place?

Did you deliberately miss the point that Paul made from the onset about the mystery of this gift? "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries." (I Cor. 14:2). He first establishes the nature of the supernatural gift of tongues and moves on from there in a wider application - not the other way round. The problem with so many people who disparage this gift is that they jump the start and try to move backwards in their interpretation; and as such they often fall foul of the the Spirit's intended meaning.

Bobbyaf:

Why would someone speak in tongues as is customary in these churches that push the issue, and not be able to even as much as understand what they are communicating to God, assuming that is what the purpose is?

You are trying to play judge over matters you don't know. How many of these people do you personally know for certain? If the tongue-speaker does not understand what he prays to God in tongues, then he is to "pray that he may interpret" (verse 13). I have known many people who follow this divine path and have seen much blessing thereto.

Bobbyaf:

It is plain and simple that simple truths are being overlooked. In fact the more they talk about the issue the more confusing they make it seem.

Again, self-descriptive of yourself. Try not overlooking the simple truth of Scripture, and I guarantee you that understanding will come.

@abdkadir,

My thanks for yours.

However, it is really out of place to refer to discussants with such language earlier. The persuasions of many are quite diverse and not as simplistic as you stated. That is why the discussions; and more so because so many things that people take for granted in either faiths become well-rounded as people share their concerns and questions on the Forum.

Sometimes, some of the discussions become heated and escalate into something else. However, that should not be the reason for decrying the discussions as such.

I hope this helps clarify some points. Cheers and best regards.

@buluti,

buluti:

@ syrup for now please lets leave the issue of where she worships she believes in speaking in tongues.

Well, I'm not concerned about where she worships. I had the same concerns as you, when I asked her the question; as in the first line of yours:

buluti:

Okay Nella thanx but please note you were not obliged to answer my question, it was based on what you stated i asked the question.

If someone actually believes in tongues, he/she would not speak about issues the way she did.

@Nella,

Can I just ask you: does your church or you yourself speak in tongues?

@Bobbyaf,

Lose my cool? I thought you could do better than your SDA-cultism taught you to accuse others with unbridled pride?

@Bobbyaf,

Bobbyaf:

I am sure you didn't mean for it to come out this way, did you? Of course syrup with his spiritual eyes was ready to show both of you toppling over each other, without reading between the lines, just to win an argument.

Your spiritual eyes have really helped you confuse my gender - keep slobbering. If your lullaby is about winning an argument on the Forum, it is no wonder you sweat it up and still take such thorough beating.

@Bobbyaf,

When you have lost face, your low thinking comes to the fore. Hiding behind such pseudo-spirituality has not helped your SDA cultism, has it?