Aksel Ankersen wrote:
I didn't claim they never say عيسى under any circumstances; I said Arabic Christians know their Messiah as يَسُوع
AhmedBahgat wrote:I am not dismissing you, I am dismissing your crap
if I dismiss you then I will never reply to your comments
now, tell me, how that web site is calling Jesus, Isa?
You lied when you said the Arab christians never call him as such,
When discussing Jesus in the Koran someone may call him Isa, because that's the Koranic name for him, doesn't mean it's a faithful rendition of his Aramaic name.
AhmedBahgat wrote:while what I showed is clearly an arab christian web site calling Jesus, Isa
Your explanation for such web site calling him as such is nothing but a joke, because the Muslims also refer to Jesus, as Masih and as Ibn Mariam, therefore we donot need the christians calling him as such for the Muslims to understtand them, in fact the Muslims refer to Jesus as Masih more than Isa
Here is another Christian website (http://3lotus.com/) that spells Jesus as Yashua and adds Isa in brackets just for the Muslims.
And here is the English version of the same page... As you can see they only added Isa for the benefit of Arabic Muslim readers.
And guess what? The site's pitched at Muslims, that's why they add the Islamic version of his name.
Can you find any Christian websites that use Isa in preference to Yashua?
Oh I'll make it easy for you, there's heaps of stuff to attack in Zoroastrian scriptures. You'll have a really good time.
AhmedBahgat wrote:Look pal, you proved to be stupid who is itchy to find a mistake in the Quran, and because you cannot, you want to cook one, you are lucky that I know nothing about your scriptures, otherwise I wouyld have showed you piles of crap in it, possibly I will one day, stick around
"The cleanser who has not performed the cleansing according to the rites, shall he taken to a desert place; there they shall nail him with four nails, they shall take off the skin from his body, and cut off his head."
Fraser Ravâet, p. 398, commenting on Vendidad Fargard 9, line 47
Truly, this religion went through dark ages after the invasion of Alexander.
"As regards the negro one says, "Azi Dahak (The necromancer), during his reign, let loose a devil on a young woman, and let loose a young man in a park. They performed coition with [the sight] of the apparition; the negro came into being through that [novel] kind of coition." Greater Bundahishn, Chapter 14B line 2
Look pal, I have no time to argue, I have a lot to do around, but here is my final say
the arabs also know Mohammed, as Ahmed, as Mustafa as Taha
We also know Yunis as Za-Alnoon
We also know Jesus as Isa and Masih and Ibn Mariam
The arabic Quran is not the outcome of a translation to Arabic, while the Arabic bible is a translation from a bloody differnet language, therefore if you want to consider that there is a mistake one way or another, then bloody oath, it has to be in the tranlsation of the Arabic bible which is a translation to already corrupt book, which is showing a noble prophet fuking his own daughters, so calling another prophet by the wrong name is bloody 100% plausible
now you need to bloody dismiss yourself from your own thread, how about you ask the Ms to trash it?, that would be better, I guess