Faith Freedom International

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:

The Cat wrote:Yeshua (Hebrew for Jesus) is Allah's Yasha'u (ie. Will)! Quoting my own notes:

18.23-24: And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow, Except if Allah will ('Illā 'An Yashā'a Allāhu).

There you have it: Yasha'a (plainly Yeshua, Jesus) is God's Will, ie. ISA !

42.19: He provideth for whom He will (Yarzuqu Man Yashā'u).

30.48:Allah is He Who sendeth the winds so that they raise clouds, and spreadeth them along the sky as pleaseth Him (Kayfa Yashā'u),
and causeth them to break and thou seest the rain downpouring from within them. And when He maketh it to fall on whom
He will (Yashā'u Min Ibādihi) of His bondmen, lo! they rejoice;

So, the name of Jesus is written in the Koran: Yashu and, like that of Isa, it means God's Will.

9.15: And He will remove the anger of their hearts. Allah relenteth toward whom He will (Alá Man Yashā'u). Allah is Knower, Wise.

In 9.26-27 Yashu is associated with the Jewish Sekinah (Arabic Sakinah, Peace of Reassurance).

9.26-27: Then Allah sent His peace of reassurance (Sakīnatahu) down upon His messenger and upon the believers,
and sent down hosts ye could not see, and punished those who disbelieved. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
---Then afterward Allah will relent toward whom He will (Yashā'u); for Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shekhinah" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakina" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In the Koran, Isa is but a lordly attribute and Yashu (Yeshua) became a verb: The Verb (will).

24.46: Verily We have sent down revelations and explained them. Allah guideth whom He will (Yashā'u) unto a straight path.

The etymological correspondence is so crystal clear that not a shadow of a doubt can remain: Jesus is attested as Allah's Will, His VERB.

I've said: The conjunction of Isa and Allah is all too well attested in the expression Insha 'Allah (إن شاء الله) ! So God will...
But it's also related to another Arabic term, Mā šāʾ (Masih, Messiah) Allāh (ما شاء الله), which means "God has willed it".

In short, Allah can't possibly act except through that Will, ie His VERB, which was at the beginning just like Jn.1.1: Yasha'u !!!

Why doesn't Jesus have a father in the Koran?
Because he's co-substantial WITH Allah (3.59)!

So, Jesus is Inshallah and mashallah? What else is he? You cracked me up.

Now prove that the Hebrew Yeshua, (YS-h) isn't the root for the Arabic Yasha'a (YS-h), ie. Allah's Will...

Inch'Allah is simply a contraction for Isa as Yasha'a Allah (YESHUA), His Will thus His VERB, as per John 1.1...
18.23-24: And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow, Except if Allah will (Yashā'a Allāhu).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insha%27Allah" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In Islam, Jesus (Arabic: عيسى عليه السلام‎, Isa (note: in most Arabic speaking countries, "isa" is short for In šhāʾ Allāh (إن شاء الله) when typing with English letters)) is considered to be a Messenger of God who was sent to guide the Children of Israel (banī isrā'īl) with a new scripture, the Injīl or Gospel. He is considered the Messiah. He is also a word from God and a spirit from Him. He is considered honoured in this world and in the Hereafter...

And this honored messenger is what these verses are all about:
69.40: Certainly, it is the Word brought by an honored Messenger (Innahu Laqawlu Rasūlin Karīmin).
81.19: That this is in truth the word of an honored messenger, (Innahu laqawlu rasoolin kareemin).
86.13: Most surely it is a decisive word (Innahu Laqawlun Faşlun).

Nothing to do with Gabriel, an unwilled automaton who had to bow to Adam so obligated by Allah's Will, ie. Yasha'u (Hebrew, Yeshua).

And where does the lordly title of ISA stemming out from? Hinduism!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isha_Upanishad" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The name of the text derives from the incipit, īśā, "by the Lord (Isha)"....

Or are you going to tell me that the Koran existed before the name Yeshua & the title of Isa?

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:Sulb in the verse is not pronounced in the way "Bulb" is pronounced.
Sulb is pronounced as Soolb but not a long ooo though! The Arabic word that you are trying to use, is Salb (Thalb).

Who's altering the Koran now? Yakhruju min bayni alssulbi wa-alttara-ibi
AB's search demonstrated that crucifixion must be considered as a root form for sulb.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:

The Cat wrote:The spear released a sudden flow of blood and water (John 19:34). Not only does this prove that Jesus was already dead when pierced, but Thompson believes it is also evidence of cardiac rupture. Respected physiologist Samuel Houghton believed that only the combination of crucifixion and rupture of the heart could produce this result.

Please check with forensic surgeons and experts, not a physiologist. After I brought up the point and mentioned that blood and water cannot flow out from a dead body, you have come up with another wild imagination and unsupported point "Jesus was standing up when dead just minutes before,". Any proof? Gospels do not agree with that. Jesus was already dead for hours, according to the story. Blood stops flowing when a person dies and coagulate.

1. Check what Dr William Stroud wrote on this. 2. Physiologists are experts. 3. Such is Dr. James Thompson.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Thom ... ologist%29" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The rest of your statement is a pity: What do you think is the position of a crucified guy? Resting on his back maybe?
Then again there is no proof that he was dead 'for hours': the soldier wouldn't then feel the need to check that at all.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:Surah 81 has nothing about Jesus. There is no Jesus in there. The very first verse says that the stars
will lose their light and that also covers the so-called "piercing star"....

86:13 This verse refers to Quran.
81:19 and 69:40 These verses refer to Gabriel.
Jesus is not called anywhere in Quran as Rasoolin-Kareem.

Regarding breathing in, neither Allah breathed nor pushed Gabriel in. There is no talk of Gabriel in 66:12 and Allah breathed life into the fetus or simply gave life to the zygote of Jesus. God can do anything. Right? So, God simply said something like this: "Let Mary conceive and .....she was pregnant!"

First this is what happened to the Crux which disappeared from the northern hemisphere by 200AD.
Second, the piercing star is mentioned in surah 86, not 81, but they do are related (as with 66.40):

81.19: That this is in truth the word of an honored messenger, (Innahu laqawlu rasoolin kareemin).
86.13: Most surely it is a decisive word (Innahu Laqawlun Faşlun).

How and where can 86.13 refers to Koran? How and where do 69.40 and 81.19 refer to Gabriel since it is Isa
that is declared honored (illustrious, noble) in 3.45? You, yourself, admitted that Gabriel can't be Allah's Ruh.

AGAIN, if any fetus/zygote of Jesus was already in Mary's womb, how could she be called chaste?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chaste" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Show me a clear verse that truly identifies Gabriel -with and as- the rasoolin kareem.
Why are Muslims so reluctants to see God's Word but in an automaton such as Gabriel?

27.40: For lo! my Lord is Absolute in independence, Bountiful (Rabbī Ghanīyun Karīmun).

Here we read that 'karimun' is related to God Himself most probably as Ar-Rahman, the Koranic name for Jesus' father.
43.45: Did We ever appoint gods to be worshiped beside the Beneficent ? Now what can this possibly mean?

So now Jesus is also a Verb. Is it? What is up?

Now try to derive ISA (Inshallah) from this عِيسَى

I have not read AB's posts on this subject, so I would not comment.

Sulb does not mean to crucify. I am sure AB knows that because he defined it correctly.The Arabic word for that is Salb and the cross is Saleeb and there is no such word as Suleeb for cross in Arabic. Please check Lane's Lexicon, which is very popular with non-Muslims.

The verse does not say "Yakhruju min-alssalbi wa-alttara-ib". If it had been written that way and you had assumed that Salb was the vertical post and Taraib was the top horizontal bar, then you could have claimed that Jesus was coming out of the cross of Salb and Taraib. We see none of that.

You need to mark two important words: Min and Bayn. Please read my explanation in the thread I gave.

We also do not see the verse saying, "Yakhruju min-alsaleeb", which would mean "Coming out of the cross".
So, the message is that semen was being ejaculated as a result of the joint action carried out by the male and the female.
Jesus was not the semen.

Of course, Kareem has been used in Quran for Allah. But Rasoolin Kareem has only been used for Gabriel, not for Jesus or others.

The links given are useless.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:So now Jesus is also a Verb. Is it? What is up?

Now try to derive ISA (Inshallah) from this عِيسَى

How the Hebrew name Yeshua became the Arabic Yasha'a, well ask Allah but it's plainly there for all to see.

In fact, as far as I know, this is a world premiere right here at FFI.

Read again: Inch'Allah is simply a contraction for... Yasha'a Allah (YESHUA), His Will thus His VERB...
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insha%27Allah" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

18.23-24: And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow, Except if Allah will (Yashā'a Allāhu).

That's (18.24) the Koranic root for Inch'Allah accepted by all Islamic scholars. Your own fancies won't change an iota to this!

Now prove that the Hebrew Yeshua, (YS-h) isn't the root for the Arabic Yasha'a (YS-h), ie. Allah's Will...

You can't disprove the crystal clear shared etymology of both names: Yeshua is Allah's Will (Yasha'u). PERIOD.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etymology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:Of course, Kareem has been used in Quran for Allah. But Rasoolin Kareem has only been used for Gabriel, not for Jesus or others.

I have ask you time again to prove it.

Since you stick to mere bold assertions, you can't.

So you've lost and are running away...

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:I have not read AB's posts on this subject, so I would not comment.

viewtopic.php?p=135392#p135392" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:I have not read the entire discussion on that link but I have to agree with AhmedBahagt. He is right.

So you've just lied...

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Jesus didn't even specifically say he was Son of God, but as I clearly showed you, others referred to him that way, even God himself. And it insn't isolated to one book as you attempted to claim. You ignored that post.

As to Jesus saying he was God or connected directly to God somehow, there are some cryptic references that support that, like when he told Phillip that if he has seen him, he has seen the Father, as well as others, so it's not like people are pulling this notion of the Trinity out of thin air. Some verse support the notion, some don't. It's hard to say for sure.

At least you answered one of my four questions honestly and I commend you for that.

And answered every question honestly and always do. I'm not a Muslim.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote: However, in my view, the same goes for the rest of my questions. There is nothing cryptic, MbL. It is just that the writing is bad, poor and ambiguity arose only after incompetent men started quarreling about his nature. Too many cooks spoiled the Jesus Broth.

If we read John 14, and the famous line he told Philip, the same passage shows he said he was going to the Father in Heaven and he talked about the Father in Heaven. Jesus did not tell Philip, "Philip, I AM the father!"

Why is that required?? If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. I am in the Father and the Father is in me. Jesus and the Father are one. Not one and the same, but linked as one.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote: In the bulk of the verses, he has confirmed that the Father was the God and was working through him. There is nothing cryptic in those verses.

John 20:17 is so plain and obvious, when it shows that he was neither the Father nor God.

Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’

I told you the first time, some verses back the Trinity, others don't. It's hard to say.

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:But let's take a look at what the perfect book that is the letter for letter dictation of Allah has to say about this false Christian concept of "Trinity" or "3 Gods" (not 3 in 1).

5:73. Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.

5:5:74. Will they not then turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

75. The Messiah, son of Marium is but an apostle; apostles before him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman; they both used to eat food. See how We make the communications clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away.

So, what is the problem with above? Christians believe: The Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Ghost is God. Right?
Trinity confirms that. Doesn't it?

Well, it doesn't mention the Holy Spirit above, it mentions Mary instead. Do you see the huge problem now??

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:116. And when Allah will say: O Isa son of Marium! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great knower of the unseen things.

So it's clearly telling us that the Christians are wrong for taking Jesus and Mary as part of a Trinity rather than worshiping only Allah. Perhaps Allah would have preferred if the Christians took Jesus and the Holy Spirit as part of the Trinity, because that's what they actually did and Allah never once complained about that. Never even mentioned it

No. Allah is not saying that all Christians take Mary into the Trinity. The above verse refers to a point in time, i.e., on the Last Day, when Allah will question Jesus.

It's referring to what Christians believed and Jesus saying that he didn't tell them to believe that. Also, 5:73-75 is referring to what Muhammad thought that Christians believed. Whoops!!

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote: Christianity of today, was not the same as the Christianity practiced by his followers and the one which was founded centuries after he was gone. The disciples never believed that he was God or the Son of God. Even, Paul, the Liar, did not believe that Jesus was God.

That's a different point that should be discussed separately. My point is that Muhammad misunderstood what the Trinity was.

As far as Paul being a liar, we have already been through this and you couldn't answer. Why would a liar continue to lie when it continues to cause them torture and imprisonment? Why would a liar continue to lie when it continues to cause him to collect 20% of the booty? See the difference?? Anybody with common sense would know that regardless of whether Paul was truly guided or not, or whether he was right or not, he was sincere and no liar. The same cannot be automatically said for someone who is benefiting from something that might be a lie.

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Why is that required?? If you have seen me, you have seen the Father. I am in the Father and the Father is in me. Jesus and the Father are one. Not one and the same, but linked as one.

And your point is what, that this statement somehow links Jesus to God in their essence?

The expression of being "in" eachother can easily be understood if one looks at the context of its use throughout the NT;
Jn14:1-9 shows the apostles having trouble understanding Jesus, in v7 Jesus says to know him would be to know God since he was conveying knowledge about God. Then Phillip asks him to see God (meaning his disciples seperated between Jesus and God) to which Jesus answers "He that has seen me has seen the Father". God cannot be seen according to Jesus Jn1:18,5:37 so the only way that He can be known is through His signs and messengers (Jesus in this case).

Jn14:10-11"I am in the Father, and the Father in me.." as well as Jn17:21,23,26 all use the same expression of being "in" eachother for Jesus, the believers and God. Jesus asks God "just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us", he wants the believers to be "in" God and "in" himself so that they believe in his mission "so that the world may believe that you have sent me". This irrefutably proves that being "in" eachother is a figure of speech meaning a common position of truth. When Jesus is "in" us Col1:27, it does not make us divine or the messiah.
Same thing with Jn10:30"I and my father are one" the verse doesnt say "one God". The word "one" doesnt mean physical unity but unity of principle and agreement as it is crystal clear in Jn17 where Jesus asks God that all his followers "may be one". The expression is used today. Even in the Quran, the messengers are "one" with God because of their common position of truth and the fact that they represent God's authority on earth 4:80"He who obeys the Messenger, obeys Allah".

In 1Cor3:8KJV Paul says that he had planted the seed and Apollos had watered it. Then he said, "he who plants and he who waters are one". In the Greek texts, the wording of Paul is the same as that in Jn10:30, yet no one claims that Paul and Apollos make up "one being". Also, the NIV translates 1Cor3:8 as "he who plants and he who waters have one purpose". This further proves the non-literal meaning of the expression and the deliberate translation of the phrase as "are one" in one bible, but as "have one purpose" in another bible further exposes the trinitarian bias of bible editors.
Jesus as a prophet of God always did God’s will, not his own Lk22:42,Jn5:30,6:38; he and God have "one purpose".

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Why would a liar continue to lie when it continues to cause them torture and imprisonment?

You mean such as the prophet Muhammad throughout the majority of his prophetical call?

So Paul was tortured and emprisonned. Are you speaking of the Paul of the NT, the one who was one of the chief persecutors of eary Christianity and who allegedly found faith in Jesus in the most self-contradictory way and thus entered the ranks of the early Christians, was protected throughout his "ministry" from the Jewish crowd wanting to kill him by the Roman authorities who had even deployed an army for his sake Acts16:37-39,21:31-32,22:25-29,23:12-27,25:11-12,24-25,26:32 and who apparently even aqcuitted him from all charges laid against him by the Jews Acts23:29,25:13-26:31. A bizarre twist follows, showing Paul being given an escort to Rome to present his case to Caesar himself, simply because he had requested it and yet all local authorities had cleared him from any charges.
Upon his arrival to Rome, he was allowed to live by himself, receive visitors and continue his preaching freely, protected by a soldier Acts28:16-31. It is said he was finally acquitted of the charges against him and therefore started travelling around Europe and the Mediterranean coasts to spread his teachings to the gentiles.
It is hard therefore to imagine how he would be arrested again by the Romans and brought back to Rome to be executed as Church tradition alledges. In fact, the so-called "prison letters" -though traditionally ascribed to Paul in his Roman captivity despite recent Biblical scholarship– actually say nothing beyond the words "prisoner in Jesus Christ" and "bonds" to endorse that claim. Yet, Pauline vocabulary is full of such words evoking servitude, suffering and "imprisonment", all of which to convey the idea of his metaphorical servitude to Jesus. "Rome" is nowhere mentioned in any of the prison letters. The whole claim rests on the single reference to "Caesar's household" of Phil4:22, and the use of "palace" in Phil1:13"My bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all other places".

The Bible does not say how or when Paul died, and history does not provide any information. It is only Christian tradition that has some unreliable accounts on how his life ended around the mid 60s A.D., during the reign of Nero.

http://www.biblestudy.org/question/sauldie.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"But there is great uncertainty on these subjects, so that we cannot positively rely on any account that even the ancients have transmitted to us concerning the death of this apostle; and much less on the accounts given by the moderns; and least of all on those which are to be found in the Martyrologists. Whether Paul ever returned after this to Rome has not yet been satisfactorily proved. It is probable that he did, and suffered death there, as stated above; but still we have no certainty" (Commentary on the Bible by Adam Clarke, commenting on Acts 28:31).

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Why would a liar continue to lie when it continues to cause him to collect 20% of the booty? See the difference?

The prophet Muhammad's position in his nation as a statesman, similarly to the prophet Moses' status among his people, required him to centralize and redistribute the religious taxes and war booty primarly among the needy and displaced as made clear in the Quran, then for the establishement of the Muslims as a nation and for the defense budget.
What is your basis for comparing prophets and statesmen like Muhammad and Moses to Paul who admitted using deception in his modus operandi to teach his followers how to be effective missionaries "I have made a fool of myself, but you drove me to it...crafty fellow that I am, I caught you by trickery"2Cor12:11,16, he openly encouraged lying when preaching Jesus Phil1:15-18,1Cor9:19-21, because "The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached" in order to "win as many as possible" (we can witness this even today with the deception of missionaries exploiting the weak and vulnerable minds as they did in the past, they have been caught in some Muslim countries spreading false Qurans or distorting its meaning to fit their doctrines)
This strategy helped him earn money from the Gentiles for the expansion of his church in Jerusalem and beyond to reachout to the gentiles (which further marginalized the original followers of "the way") 2Cor8.

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Anybody with common sense would know that regardless of whether Paul was truly guided or not, or whether he was right or not, he was sincere and no liar.

Why dont you clear these apparent lies from Paul on which rests his entire claim of "conversion" that led him to join those whom he was appointed to destroy, Jesus's follower known as the follewers of "the way".
So on his road to Damascus, Paul claims to have seen Jesus in a vision. If we were to analyze these variant descriptions, made by the same man, as in a court of law, they would be thrown out as fabrication.
It is particularly clear in the KJV -other bible versions such as the NIV attempt to harmonize the accounts- in Acts 9:3-7 where Paul falls to the ground and the others didnt see anything except hearing Jesus'voice then in Acts 22:6-9 the others didnt hear the voice but saw the light and in Acts 26:14 all fall contradicting 9:3-7.

Centaur wrote:how would anyone possibly debate this moron, unless they leave their brains behind.
how come isa in Arabic same as Insha Moon god?
Messiah same as Masha Allah


Cat is a spinner and sistractor, he doesnt know what he is talking about.The only thing he does here invent new base less stories every day using his half knowledge and google and shout Eureka.

Thanks very much for saying that and having read the latest posts from Cat, I agree with you.

The Cat wrote:

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:I have not read AB's posts on this subject, so I would not comment.

viewtopic.php?p=135392#p135392" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:I have not read the entire discussion on that link but I have to agree with AhmedBahagt. He is right.

So you've just lied...

I never tell a lie.

You wrote in one of your posts on Page 3: "1. Sulb by AhmedBahgat (sexual male organ?)... :wacko: "

I had replied: "I have not read the entire discussion on that link but I have to agree with AhmedBahagt. He is right.

I have also written about this in a thread here, which was started by Enceladus, titled "Re: Allah doesn't know where sperm come from". It was a very silly thread but it became quite interesting to educate folks. Perhaps you missed reading the posts there."

The Cat wrote:

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:Of course, Kareem has been used in Quran for Allah. But Rasoolin Kareem has only been used for Gabriel, not for Jesus or others.

I have ask you time again to prove it.

Since you stick to mere bold assertions, you can't.

So you've lost and are running away...

So, can you show me for which prophets Rasoolin Kareem has been mentioned in Quran? You could not.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:So now Jesus is also a Verb. Is it? What is up?

Now try to derive ISA (Inshallah) from this عِيسَى

You have not tried to show us that an ISA can be derived out of this. With Mashallah, you would get MSA. How can MSA be Jesus?

The Cat wrote:How the Hebrew name Yeshua became the Arabic Yasha'a, well ask Allah but it's plainly there for all to see.

In fact, as far as I know, this is a world premiere right here at FFI.

I would rate it as the most hilarious world premiere here.

The Cat wrote:Read again: Inch'Allah is simply a contraction for... Yasha'a Allah (YESHUA), His Will thus His VERB...
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insha%27Allah" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

18.23-24: And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow, Except if Allah will (Yashā'a Allāhu).

That's (18.24) the Koranic root for Inch'Allah accepted by all Islamic scholars. Your own fancies won't change an iota to this!

Now prove that the Hebrew Yeshua, (YS-h) isn't the root for the Arabic Yasha'a (YS-h), ie. Allah's Will...

You can't disprove the crystal clear shared etymology of both names: Yeshua is Allah's Will (Yasha'u). PERIOD.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etymology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Those links are useless and atrocious. They do not even support anything that you have said. How can you apply Hebrew roots to Aramaic and Arabic words?

The name Jesus is a corruption. Yeshua is Aramaic. Yashua or Joshua is Hebrew. With that kind of argument, the Chapter Joshua in the stone age and the bronze age Bibles should be named Jesus.

Regarding your comment "18.23-24: And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow, Except if Allah will (Yashā'a Allāhu).", please note that the word Will carries no significance in the translations, as there are other words such as Want and Wish available.

If you write Allah wills and "wills" is Jesus, the verb according to you, then it would mean Allah Jesuses (verb form). This should be the 2nd world premiere right here.

I will show you the same through the bronze age Bible and you will understand that Will is not the only word, that has been used.

James 4:13-15 (New International Reader's Version)

Bragging About Tomorrow

13 Now listen, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city. We will spend a year there. We will buy and sell and make money." 14 You don't even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? It is a mist that appears for a little while. Then it disappears. 15 Instead, you should say, "If it pleases the Lord, we will live and do this or that."

James 4:13-15 (GOD’S WORD Translation)

Don’t Brag About Your Plans for the Future
13Pay attention to this! You’re saying, “Today or tomorrow we will go into some city, stay there a year, conduct business, and make money.” 14You don’t know what will happen tomorrow. What is life? You are a mist that is seen for a moment and then disappears. 15Instead, you should say, “If the Lord wants us to, we will live and carry out our plans.”

James 4:13-15 (New Century Version)

Let God Plan Your Life
13 Some of you say, "Today or tomorrow we will go to some city. We will stay there a year, do business, and make money."14 But you do not know what will happen tomorrow! Your life is like a mist. You can see it for a short time, but then it goes away.15 So you should say, "If the Lord wants, we will live and do this or that."

So, Yeshua, a name of Aramaic is not Yashaa, a verb of arabic.

Thanks for the laughter.

Ahmed chose to humiliate inmate pussy cat:

The Cat wrote:

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:So now Jesus is also a Verb. Is it? What is up?

Now try to derive ISA (Inshallah) from this عِيسَى

How the Hebrew name Yeshua became the Arabic Yasha'a, well ask Allah but it's plainly there for all to see.

In fact, as far as I know, this is a world premiere right here at FFI.

Read again: Inch'Allah is simply a contraction for... Yasha'a Allah (YESHUA), His Will thus His VERB...
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insha%27Allah" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

18.23-24: And say not of anything: Lo! I shall do that tomorrow, Except if Allah will (Yashā'a Allāhu).

That's (18.24) the Koranic root for Inch'Allah accepted by all Islamic scholars. Your own fancies won't change an iota to this!

Now prove that the Hebrew Yeshua, (YS-h) isn't the root for the Arabic Yasha'a (YS-h), ie. Allah's Will...

You can't disprove the crystal clear shared etymology of both names: Yeshua is Allah's Will (Yasha'u). PERIOD.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/etymology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What are you doing here you stupid dumb fuk of an inmate?

Jesus name in Aabic is يسوع, Yasoo with letter SEEN not letter SHEEN , you stupid, this means it also has a different root to the word Yashaa (will)

See this from the Arabic Bible showing Yasoo in Arabic



Your stupidity and ignorance are increasing day by day. You will eventually reach a level of stupidity that will certainly bypass the most stupid punk on FFI bin fagin

Back to your cell, stupid inmate

AhmedBahgat wrote:You will eventually reach a level of stupidity that will certainly bypass the most stupid punk on FFI bin fagin

Yeah, the guy who shuts up the nonsense from your festering hole every single time and leaves you speechless. DISMISSED. If you only knew how stupid people really think that is.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote

Allah never supported the stone age Bible or the bronze age Bible and it's bronze age New Testament, in Quran. Quran does not even mention the words Bible and the New Testament, because those were not given to Moses and Jesus

.

you say Allah protects his books and no one can change his words so if the torah and gospel TN are not Allahs books then where are the real books ? show us the books Allah protected which he gave moses and Jesus ?

if you cannot show the real books protected that means Allah is full of sh!t just like his fake prophet mohmamed.

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote
Muhammad was not told about the Bible and the New Testament and he was never asked to refer to those two books. He was not even told to consult the people who had God-given scriptures with them. The message was that people have been given scriptures and if he had any doubts, he could see that others before him had received too. But he had no doubts.

Bull Mohammed and his followers were told to ask the people of the scriptures christians and Jews if they had any doubts remember Mohammed came on the scene in the 7th century and the Bibles we have today are the same bible as then.

If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee (10:94 AYA/95 MP)

then why is Allah telling Muslims and Mohammed if in doubt to ask christians and Jews if the bible was corrupt?

The Quran is nothing more then some fake copy of the Bible...Mohammed confirms the Gospel and Torah and even goes on to say the Quran is a conformation of the Bible in the Arabic tongue, before Muslims corrupted the Quran..

And BEFORE THIS was the Book of Moses as a guide and a mercy: and THIS BOOK is a verification (of it) in the Arabic tongue to warn those who transgress and as glad tidings to the righteous." S. 46:12

This Quran verse is for Muslims who attack the Bible. who deny the "books" of allah have gone astray...hahah...

O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Apostle, and the scripture which He hath sent to His Apostle and the scripture which He sent to those before (him). Any who denieth Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Apostles, and the Day of Judgement, hath gone far, far astray (4:136 AYA).

Muslims better go repent for attacking Allah's books that the Quran says no one can change a single word of Allah. but you Muslims attack Allahs books and his word in the Quran, Muslims have gone astray making Allah a liar..

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:Question to Christians:

Did Jesus teach manners and etiquette? Did he himself teach people to speak nicely with others? If he did, please quote and post here.

He did even more, and was wise enough to say it all in one sentence. Do to others as you would have them do to you. Manners and etiquette are nonsense that people make up.

AhmedBahgat wrote: Jesus name in Aabic is يسوع, Yasoo with letter SEEN not letter SHEEN , you stupid, this means it also has a different root to the word Yashaa (will). See this from the Arabic Bible showing Yasoo in Arabic

The root stems from different influences, silly you. The Koranic Yashaa (YS-h) coming right from the Hebrew Yeshua (YS-h).
When will you stop confusing modern Arabic with Classical? Greek with Hebrew? The Greek Gospels with the Koran's Arabic?
You're a wonder!

AhmedBahgat wrote:What are you doing here you stupid dumb fuk of an inmate? .... Your stupidity and ignorance are increasing day by day. You will eventually reach a level of stupidity that will certainly bypass the most stupid punk on FFI bin fagin. Back to your cell, stupid inmate.

How would you translate that in Aabic?

Ghalibkhastahaal wrote:I never tell a lie.

You're conveniently mixing up everything all the time (1)

Statement A: I have not read the entire discussion on that link but I have to agree with AhmedBahagt. He is right.
Statement B: I have not read AB's posts on this subject, so I would not comment.

A. You have read enough of it to make your mind;
B. You haven't read about it so you can't comment

You've lied even on the fact that you've lied! How's that! So twice, and the rooster isn't up yet...