₦airaland Forum

As far as i am concerned a terrorist can come in any gender, race, size or creed.

But the facts reveal over 99% of them are Muslims.

@Olabowale,

Can you understand what you read at all. My quote about obviously shows I do not believe in anything called original sin, rather I believe in what the Bible refers to as the sin nature. Is that too much for you to grasp?

By the way, your whole argument is supposed to be based on the Bible and not on what one person says or another. Please provide the Bible quote that refers to the original sin. Until then, you are just parambolating in darkness and self-illusion.

@Seun,

It's very convenient for you to take such a stand. Why don't you tell us what you think of the article you posted before asking for our opinion?

@Brown-eyes,

Well what do you expect when posts depicting Muslims as evil wrongdoers are all over the place. Instead of arriving at your own conclusions based on hearsay, read the Quran.

Aren 't they wrong-doers?  What would you expect us to call them: traitors, resistance fighters?  There is only one thing that binds all these suicide bombers together:  Islam.  It don't matter if there nationalities is American, Briton, Saudi, Yemen, Pakistan, Nigerian etc. The common factor is Islam and that is the galvanising force behind them.  And by the way, I have read the Qu'ran and observed the lifestyle of the Prophet of Islam, and I still arrive at the same conclusion:  Islam is evil.

The Bible and the Quran both have one common element and that is to fight for God. As Nilla mentioned before, look at the Old testament, eye for an eye etc. The very same God you worship, ordered the killings of women and children for the simple fact they had worshipped another. The people who carried out the killings believed they were fighting for their religion.

So why arent Christians bombing all over the world?  Are you saying Christinas are not persecuted or never suffer injustice?  It must be that the teachings of the Bible to us as Christians clearly depicts something different than you seem to have observed.  Jesus, who is our example, and by extension the Apostles who were His direct followers showed us by example that peace is our only option.  What did Mohammed showed by example?  He was only a man of peace when the politics and economic situation favors him and his Allah.  He fights and kills when he feels threatened.  I could explain the violence we see in the Olt Testament in context to you, but this aint a religion thread and it will be out of place.  And by the way, the fighting in the Old Testament wasn't for a religion, it was for a Soveriegn State: Isreal.  Isreal just happened to be a Theocratic State.

You cannot condemn one particular group's violent actions and at the same time condone the violent actions of another.
The 'Operation Northwoods' document has highlighted the probability of the US govt being capable of killing their own people to achieve their own goals.
This has been covered by ABC news - http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=
The entire document can be found here - http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

Are we talking about the U.S. here?  The issue we are discussing now is all about why the suicide bombers believe in the violence that they are so quick to carry out.  Or are you trying to justify their violence because of the violence of others?

@babs787,

I will provide answers to your questions one at a time and expect your response on each as we go:

1. Why can God be unjust when he had sent many prophets to preach repentance? How can countless men inherit a sin they have never committed? And if sin means the breaking of God’s law (according to dictionary), which of the children of Adam had ever known anything called forbidden tree?.

May I ask you where you got the teaching that countless men inherit a sin they have never commited? Is that the Koranic teaching, 'cos it sure isn't in the Bible. Please provide the biblical quotes to support this assertion then we can go on from there. Until such biblical basis are established, then I have no reason to provide you a response because I am here only to defend my faith which is based on the Bible.

@babs787,

You are the one that is insincere. Do you see any differences in the different translations I showed you? I have asked you to bring the biblical passages with such contradictions forward. You are just quoting all these "dem say, dem say". Bring forth your proofs and please let us know which translations you refer to in each case.

And for your information, there are study tools that show you the original Greek and Hebrew words and explain the different shades of meaning of those words. So you really are not making any sense at all.

The different translations are no different than the once provided for the Qu'ran, and both must be subject to the same rules of critism. Both must be condemned or upheld in their entirety

@Brown-eyes,

I can see you still hold to the notion that we hate muslims just because we condemn their actions and the galvanising impetus behind that action: Islam.  I think the confusion you have is assuming love is passive.  Love is confrontational as we see in the case of Jesus.  He loved the Pharisees and Saducees of His days and died for them on the cross, but still he confronted them and called them what they are: hypocrites, sons of hell etc,  Will you call that hating them?  I wonder what you'll say if I say the same things about muslims today.

@Afam,

We sure need to question and find out why a person reacts the way they do.  I have no doubt that one of the main reasons why there are suicide bombers today is because of the perception of injustice that they feel.  However, why are they choosing to go violent instead of advocating a peaceful form of resistance which is usually more effective in solving and overcoming injustice?

If indeed the final authority over these people is the Qu'ran, and they choose to live their lives by the injunctions of that book, then to understand why they react the way they do, we must know what the Qu'ran says they should do under such circumstances.  

From my understanding, a Christian who retaliates violently is an exception to the rule, while a Muslim who chooses to turn the other cheek and live peacefully is a deviation from the teachings of their faith.  Mohammed and Jesus are proofs of this statement.

Assuming the final authority ofver these people is the Bible, do you think there will be suicide bombings today?  Take from the Qu'ran the need to avenge injustice and the promise of eternal bliss for those who kill infidels, then there wont be suicide bombings as we know it today.  Add into the Qu'ran that 'vengeance belongs to Allah and him alone' and see if there will be a single suicide bomber in Islam.

Until we consider these scenario, we still won't know the mindset of these Islamo-Fascist as my President, George W. Bush calls them.

@olabowale,

Don't deceive yourself about being knowledgable. I have exposed your false knowledge in my response and you chose as usual to ignore it, because it does not follow your false train of thought.

Anyway, when you provide biblical quotes that says we inherited Adam's sins and that there is an Original sin in the Bible, then you will be worthy of some intelligent conversations.

@olabowale,

I provided the follwoing answers in response to your accusations about different Bibles on another thread, and you just chose to ignore it.  Here it is again for your perusal.

We do not have so many different Bibles.  Rather we have different translations of the same Bible.  May I ask you, how come you guys also have different Korans in the sense of YUSUFALI, PICKTHAL and SHAKIR just to name a few?  Arent you being hypocritical when you make such a statement?  The different translations are just what it is: translations.  The king James Bible for instance is almost anachronistic in its style of presentation because of the language.  We do not speak such English today, and it is only logical that other translations will be required.  Each translations has its style with respect to the language and that is only the difference.  All are translated from the same manuscripts but the style of delivery is just the only difference.  For instance, here are other translations of that same Matthew 5:18.  If you are honest, you will see that the message is the same, only the delivery is different.

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. (New Revised Standard Version)

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished. (American Standard version)

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (New Internationsal Version)

I assure you, until heaven and earth disappear, even the smallest detail of God's law will remain until its purpose is achieved.  (New Living Translation).

So tell me, isnt the message the same in all?  And while you are at that, please explain the difference in the Koranic translations by YUSUFALI, PICKTHAL and SHAKIR.

You people have claimed so much that the Bible is changed and I wonder, can you guys just provide us the real Bible?  I ask, at what point was it changed?  Where are the ones available before that time?  Obviously, Muhammad must have believed the Bible available at his time was authentic for him to have said in Surah 29.046
YUSUFALI: And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."
PICKTHAL: And argue not with the People of the Scripture unless it be in (a way) that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which hath been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our Allah and your Allah is One, and unto Him we surrender.
SHAKIR: And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit.

Maybe you should do a compare and contrast of different Bible passages as I did above and let us have the discrepancies you claim you notice.  Until then, you are just blowing hot air, and you need to sit down and do some thinking.

May I ask you what you mean by the original sin.  As I stated before, can you just provide the scriptures that talks about original sins and humans inheriting Adam's sins that you are professing here.  Or could this be another lie sold to your gullible self by those filthy clerics who do not know any better.  As Jesus said, "when the blind leads the blind, both shall fall into the ditch" (my paraphrase). 

It is obvious that you lack the intellectual capacity to hold any train of thought and argument, and you only copy and paste all the misinformation that you are fed. 

I'm sure you will understand if I can't answer your question because it has no biblical basis.  As far as the Bible teaches, there is nohing like original and fake sins, neither does the Bible teaches that we inherited Adam's sins.  You are a sorely misguided fellow and I hope you will let your head and heart lead you ahead of your zeal.

You have still not told me what the purpose of words are. Why do you speak? Why do you talk to others? What would be yor intention when you are involved in a conversation with someone.

Also, you are yet to tell me if it is Arabic that the speak in Heaven. Was it Arabic that Angel Gabriel spoke to Mohammed? So is Arabic a better language than all others?

@nilla,

I don't have enough knowledge on Islam to agree that it advocates and encourages violence.
Do you know all about Islam religion?
If someone thats non-christian reads some part of the old testament, I wonder what they would deduce.

I don't know all about Islam religion, but I know enough to know it doesn't encourage peaceful co-existence unless in a situation where Islam is dominant.
I have always advocated that the best way to know what a religion teaches is to look at the founder. In that case, I will like us to consider how Mohammed practiced his religion. Let's compare this to how Jesus practiced His faith. For the sake of argument, we might even consider the lives of the Apostles as the first converts to Christianity.

Many have claimed christianity too does not have a saintly past, and I agree with that conclusion. However, I will point out very clearly that those actions were contrary to the belief and practice of the founder of the church: Jesus Christ. On the other hand, can we really say Mohammed always stood for peace? If we claim those blowing themselves up in the name of Islam are not true Moslems, what do we say of Mohammed, the onder of the religion?

When we are able to understand Mohammed's thoughts and lifestyle, then we will begin to understand what these Islamo-fascists are all about. Moslems consider him to be the perfect man and will do anything to be like him and protect his image and legacy. That is why you can't even make him a subject of a cartoon. Understanding Mohammed is understaning the Islamic world.

Afam, Nilla,

This is not about racial profiling or anything of that sort.  It is all about identifying the root cause of the whole wahala.  I have said it before that I believe injustice (or perhaps, perceived injustice) is a major part of this whole problem, but my point is why would some people go to the extreme point of suicide bombing and indiscriminate killing of civilians just in order to drive home a point?

The Arabs or middle Easterns are not the only once suffering injustice in the world.  We have Christians under persecution all over the world, yet we do not see us going on the mad rampage we witness in the middle east and all over the place.  Is it this same injustice that will make born Britons plan to blow up their fellow citizens in mid-air?  Nay, I say there is more to it.

We have seen injustice in the U.S. that led to the Civil liberties movement.  The guiding principle that Martin Luther King has was his faith and the fact that he knows that his faith preaches peaceful revolution and not a violent one.  If these people are exposed to such teachings and faith, don't you think they will not carry out all these carnage?    Now imagine that Moslems are the majority in the US and the Government now treats them the way Christians are being treated today.  Needless to say, the U.S would be up in flames by now.  Christians on the other hand, will try a peaceful means to bring about change like putting their vote to use as we saw in the last election, but I am so sure Moslems would have cried Jihad by now.

I watched a documentary recently, I think on BBC where a British cleric was interviewed.  I think he was an assistant to the one-eyed, handicapped cleric that was recently jailed in britain.  He made a statement that it is only Christians that are asked to turn the other cheek when slapped.  As for muslims, they go on Jihad till the perceived injustice is dealt with.  

I have argued these issues before on the religion thread, and I would go into more details and express my thoughts about this as we go on and as I deem appropriate to our discussion.

I don't hate muslims and I never say they are bad people.  All I am saying is that thier religion advocates and encourages violence even though they say their religion is one of peace.  I always point to the Author and Finisher of their faith - Mohammed as an example.  He practiced what he preached and preached what he practiced.  What was he like and how did he handle opposition?  Perhaps answering these questions will also help us to know what goes on in the mind of these people.

@Brown-Eyes,

Do you believe that Islam is the final authority guiding the Middle-Eastern People?  If you do, why then will you diverge it from their actions?

Since afam has refused to believe that religion is a major factor in play here, do you at least believe it is a factor that needs to be considered? Or can you prove categorically that religion does not even come to play at all?

Maybe a more practical view is considering a combination of all these factors, and how they have worked together to give rise to these explosive situation we have on ground.

So is there nothing more to add to the list above? Can we use that as the basis of our discussions?

@nilla,

That is why I said the list can be critiqued, if you feel oil plays no part, then we can delete it from the final list as we move the discussion along.

I cant testify to the veracity of your friend's claims, but at least, I know it is possible.

I usually don't concentrate on what the devil's doing, I give my attention to what God is doing.

Okay let's move this discussion forward. Let's all list out what we feel are the underlying causes of these conflicts, and while we scrutinize and edit these list, we can then go ahead and discuss what role each is playing and how it can be addressed. My list will include the following:

* Sense of injustice on the part of the Palestinians and the Arab nation at large.
* Religion: How has this affected all the parties
* Oil: Does it have a role?
* American Policies: What policies?
* Isreali Insecurity: The best defence they say in soccer, is Offence. Are the Jews following this stragtegy?
* Land: Who is more entitled to that land? Jews or Palestininas?

These lists are not exhaustive, and I hope I can get some additions from you all, then we can go from there.

@Afam,

You know what? We are derailing this thread by trying to find out who started what. Though I will really like to know what I said that ticked you off so it doesn't happen again. But if indeed you feel I insulted you first, then I apologise for that. I never feel too big to apologise when I know I'm wrong, and in some cases when I know I am right. A teaching in church a few weeks ago by my Pastor's son (who is an associate pastor) instructed us that one of the signs of pride is trying to prove you are right all the time. I know I am bigger than pride and do offer an olive branch.

There is no big deal to casting out demons. Discernment is required to understand who needs it, and the tool for deliverance is the name of Jesus.

I am not a Pastor as some might think it takes only a minister to do this. You just need to realise your authoruty in Christ Jesus. As a Christian, you are authorised to destroy the works of the devil and to take back that which he has stolen. Once you understand this and the possessed person is in agreement with you, then we have a done deal.

@Seun,

So are you trying to tell us that you do not agree with the article?  If you do not, why not be unbiased and tell us what you think?  Some dubious references were made to an NAB version of the Bible, and you didn't think to check those out before you made the write-up a subject of public discussion. 

What men will do to dis-prove the veracity of God's Word.

I believe in demons because the Bible teaches so. At the same time, I have personally cast out demons in people, and believe me, it's not a fluke.

@Seun,

May I ask you what translation of the Bible you are using? Is the NAB refering to the New American Version or the American Standard Version. I need to have this clarified. But in any case, you have misread those verses because Jesus' prophecy wasn't directed at Caiaphas or any one in the room for that matter. Jesus just mentioned an event that will happen in the future, and He didn't say when exactly and who exactly will see those.

However, we know Jesus is on the right hand of the majesty on high now. Stephen for one saw this when he was matyred and we know of John's revelation in the Book of Revelation. You have only tried to play with the use of words in stating your point, but I have no doubt that if Jesus was refering to Caiphas, He would have mentioned His name. Jesus was never a coward.

Jesus mistakenly tells his followers that he will return and establish his kingdom within their lifetime. Matthew 23:36 & 24:34
Amen, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. (Matthew 23:36 NAB)

You are deliberately making the wrong conclusions Seun. Matthew 23:36 is not saying anything at all about Jesus second coming. It was all about how isreal mis-treated God's prophets and the fact that that generation will suffer the consequences of such action. It seems to me you are just plain mischievous by this obvious twisting of facts.

Matthew 24:34 on the other hand refers to the genration that witnesses the parable of the fig tree as mentioned in verse Matthew 24:32. Again, you just need to read the Bible in context before picking phrases that suits your agenda.

I hope you will go back and repost or rephrase your questions again as you have only suceeded in showing a lack of scholarship and understanding of biblical terms. I will repsond as much as I feel your postings deserve a response.

I will like to ask you to do me a favor?  Can you please quote from the Bible, where it is written that we all inherited Adam's sin?  This is what you have implied throughout your write-up and I will sure like to see the scriptures you refer to before I deem your accusation worth replying.

Also, can you tell me the relevance of the language that Jesus spoke?  Is Arabic the language spoken by God since the Koran was written down in arabic?  Of what importance is the language in spiritual matters?  What is the purpose and import of words and a language?  let's see how intelligent you are in answering this questions.  If you can't answer these simple secular questions, then you will never be able to compare spiritual things with spiritual.

@Brown-Eyes,

Bush is the president of United States that makes him a leader. He has also stated he himself is a Christian.  That is how he got his Christian votes. hence therefore he is a Christian Leader. I don't know why you trying to pick my statement apart. Did i say he was the leader of a church! What you should be answering is why is he making such statements such as "God told me go to war on terrorists" whilst picking on islamic leaders for saying the same thing.

Bush may be a Christian, and that is no surprise because majority of Americans claim the christian faith. 

That you state that Bush got the votes because he is a christian just shows that you have no understanding of the politics of the U.S.  Isn't John Kerry a Catholic?  Why didn't the Catholics vote for him instead and yet voted for Bush?  The last election was all about the judiciary and nothing else.  Bush was more likely to elect Judges that do not favor abortion and homosexuality while John Kerry was likely to do the opposite.  We all know that Democrats do better economically than the Republicans, but the last eletion was just about the Values of the country that was at stake.

You are yet to show me one link or source of the statement you attributed to Bush.  I am sure there will be a lot of noise in the leftist media if he actually made that statement.  Such can never go unnoticed.  The major reson why the population is against him now is because they felt he lied to take the nation into war, not because he went to war because his God told him to.  I stand to be corrected on this.

@TayoD,

Let me help you here, list the insults or abuses you believe I sent your way and I will list mine based on the very posts you reproduced.

The problem I see here with your failure to come to terms with who started what is that you have a personal disctionary of what constitutes insults, not a universal one, put differently, you set the standards and proceed to judge others by your own standards not a universal one.

Again, it is ok for you to ask who migrated to another persons land first. Why are you not asking for the original owners of the land to claim their lands so that all these will end if you are really out for fairness?

So is telling someone to go jump in the Lake a compliment where you come from?  Or is saying someone is one of those who only speak rubbish when they open their mouth a flattering statement in your side of the world?  If that is the case, maybe I shouldn't have retaliated since you do not know any better. However, if it is considered an insult, then why say I started the trading of insults?

If you open your eyes while reading and you comprehend what you read, then you will find out I already mentioned that the Jews met the Canaanites on that land and the only people who can claim ownership ahead of the Jews is the Canaanites and not the so-called Palestinians.   

So you consider it a fair deal to have the Jews scattered all over the world while the so-called Palestinians, whose origin can be traced back to other contemporary Arab nations today stay put in the land?  Let the palestinians go back to Egypt et al where theire root is and let the Jews stay in Canaan pending the time the Canaanites come knocking

Where did you get that quote of George Bush. I've never known him to make a decision based on what God told him, rather he makes decisions based on the constitution, American interest as well as his conscience.

Brown-eyes,

I have no doubt that the jews migrated into that land.  The same can be said of the Palestinians.  So who migrated into the land first?  The Jews or the Palestininas?

Brown-eyes,

What makes Bush a Christian leader I ask? Leader of what denomination? Is his executive council and advisers made up of religious leaders? You have no basis for this statement and it will do you well to desist from such unfounded statement.

Chxta,

There are many instances in the Koran and hadith that prescribes death to non-muslims just because they are non-muslims or converts. Here is one that readily comes to mind:

009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

Why are you asking my questions with questions? Just let me know, are the present day Palestinians the Canaanites that the Isrealis removed from that land?