A 24hours response from Kai that not bad
I have work and a family- so, i post when i can.
This does not fit if Jesus is Alpha and Omega. So saying father is first is wrong. No error here moving on.
Ghaith you are missing the point entirely saying mary at all is wrong- all the quran had to do was say do not take the ruh as a god with allah-First of all show where the quran calls jesus the first and the last- and the beginning and the ending?
This is comming from a guy who think the black rock is a pagan god
Correction- it's coming from a guy who knows the black rock is worshipped by muslims- they do it five times a day every day (devout muslims anyways)
Well there are many similaraties between horus and Jesus.
Not really- you mean like the supposed virgin birth? ha haa
Zeitgeist is a movie hmm, i tought it was a serie. I might have watched a snippet out of the movie
It is called zeitgeist the movie it has three parts.
Are you denieng the existens of freemasonry kai?
Not at all Ghaith, i am denying the silly loony crackpot theories regarding them like the pyramid with one eye symbol- Beneath it are the words, novus ordo seclorum, which translate as "A new order of the ages. It does not mean "a new world order," as has been alleged by those crazy crackpots- . (New world order would be written as novus ordo mundi
e any verse you like.
Are you sure?
Seems like some Muslims are haters to.
Yeah- some muslims are at least somewhat honest out there.
Respect Kai, respect. Christians are the biggest clown when it comes taking things out of context
A fraudulent person like zakir naik does not deserve any respect.
Like the deal with Thomas calling Jesus god when he was only talking in shock when he saw Jesus
Talking in shock huh
So Zakir is doing his best. And i cant recall him taking in thing out of context.
You are very selective with those blindfolds on called wishful thinking.
re is an exampel. This is on sex with Animals, which Christians keep bashing muslims on out of Abu Dawood. I wanted to see how they twist it and what do you know?
There are a few articles on wikiislam i disagree with and some parts i dont see eye to eye with but overall it's a great source.
This is funny, since you should know that after they got it back from Qarmatians it pretty much havent moved at all since then.
There's no guarantee that the stone the green grocers returned to mecca was the same one they took. with that being said there's word out there that the stone was taken and destroyed by wahabis in 1700s.
How do you suggest we can find out how old it is?
Like i said you can get a rough idea of how old it is but not how long it has been there in the kaaba (wall of) crazy thing is it's more than likely not even the same stone mo kissed on.
Matter infact dahaha is sill being debated, ive seen muslim denie it and ive seen muslim accept it
The muslims who accept it are in deep denial- it shouldnt even be an issue up for debate the lisan al arab dictionary is very clear on the matter
. it goes way way deeper than that the Ostrich flattens the sand.
Great dramatics there yos- but at the end of the day that is pure unadulterated BS.
There are other ayas that tells us the earth is round so this is an extra.
More wishful thinking Ghaith.
Well Sam is just horrible. But zionists do sponser Answering-Islam, but not Sam solo like they do with others.
So the zionists are so desperate and believe sam is so horrible they still let him write the plurality of articles on AI- Ghaith you know how silly that all sounds?
Kai look at how old their translations are
Hmm so the meanings of allahs words change every so few years?
after your next snippet i will destroy this argument
And one of the newiest translators are that idiot Rashid. Code 19 rememeber
He is not one of the newest translators- but Yes that is the same rashid who i recalled you jumping on in our dahaha debate a while back Ghaith ha haha Yes i also remember deedat jumping on the code 19 BS and made a fool out of himself for more than ten years before he retracted it.
Anyways lets take a look at the translations rashid had his translation published in 1981 then revised in 1992
ahmed ali had his published in 1984
revised in 2001
muhammad asad had his in 1980
abdel haleems was in 2004
Syed Vickar Ahamed in 2007
aisha bewley shes sufi had hers published in 1999
you know shakir had his in 1982 his first edition with his most recent edition in 2005
You know hilali and mushin khans and ali unals alis was done in 2006 khans in 1999
Those are all new compared to yusuf alis and pickthalls
That like saying Jews are wall worshipers and Moses worshippers.
From the perspective of the torah those jews who do that are wall worshippers
Btw, this is comming from a guy saying Catholics dont worship Mary.
No its coming from a guy who knows catholics dont say they worship mary kind of like muslims who say they dont worship there stone but bow to it every day.
God wanted Bukhari to do his work, that is irefetuable fact
Really? even after you yourself pointed out conflicting hadiths regarding solomons wives? i did point out how those were different chains but it leaves the muslims in conjecture.
BTW Why not ahmed ibn hanbal or abi dawud or malik ibn anas god didnt care about their works?
and Bukhari not only did he memorize all that hadith but also the narrators compared with all those other copy pasters.
Muslims hadith seems to be as stable as Bukharis so i have no problem with those books. When we start to get to Sunan Abu Dawood i start having problems.
Some sunnis even accept Ibn Ishaq as being authentic.
well, ibn muslim was a direct student of bukhari- that is why is hadees are labeled sound or SAHIH automatically- as far as abu dawuds sunan is concerned his criteria was a little different regarding isnad he required only four main chain links in the narrations as opposed to the 6 of muslim and bukhari
There a different between worship and obediance, showing respect
PURE BULLSH!T Ghaith you dont obey stones or walls
. Catholics worship Mary, Christians worship Jesus. Nazareth Jews respect and obey Jesus they dont worship him same with Muslims and Muhammad.
Catholics dont claim too- and trinitarian christians worship trinity like catholics
Who are these nazareth jews? you mean messianic jews? those guys believe in trinity
The greeks that found out the earth was not flat tought the sperm came from the brain.
Not entirely true yos- they had numerous competing theories like the one about that sperm come from all parts of the parents' bodies and are composed of the four bodily forms: blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile and aristotles theory. but hippocrates i believed said that semen comes from the scrotumhttp://ancienthistory.about.com/od/philosophyscience/a/031511-Ancient-Greek-Genetic-Theory.htm
Still no proof of a historical Jesus
You are in deep denial yos- here is earlier post i made from the same link you provided L O L Those two josephus passages regardning jesus are real. Most experts regard them as sound and legit one of them may have additions. but the one about jesus having a brother named james is solid. Why i will even quote your wikipedia for you http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus
The overwhelming majority of modern scholars consider the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James" to be authentic and to have the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity. Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist to also be authentic.
Scholars have differing opinions on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities to the execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate, a passage usually called the Testimonium Flavianum. The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate which was then subject to Christian interpolation, Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear there is broad consensus as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like
ealize is the fact that josephus being familiar with some of the christian books show that the gospel accounts and james was in existence in the middle of the first century.
But go on i do find it amusing to see a muslim trying to disprove the existence of the 2nd greatest prophet of islam.
People dont have a problem with Pliny, few will say its a forgery, unlike Josephus.
Wrong- the quote from pliny is viewed as spurios that is fact.
As good as Ibn Kathir tafsir is, it is outdated. So i dont care what Ibn Kathir belived.
Holy batsh!t call the press- you are getting there Ghaith - so is the quran outdated?
Ghaith ibn kathir was much closer to time of quran and understood the meanings of those verses.
God punished those who disbelived. Followed Paul and Constantine etc.
No, otherwise they would have never been superior to those that disbelieved. its referencing christians the same christians of egypt arabia ethiopia that believed in trinity.
Didnt god pay them their wages, im sure you know the miraculous battles Muslims won.
Sure like the battle of uhud- and what about all those miraculous battles genghis khan won in the 1200s. etc...
Why would you say that.
Because the ottomans began their decline in the late 1500s they never gained territory after early 1600s-
Might be try, but it fits the puzzle well
Sounds more like you hammering a square peg into a circle hole.
Umm Kai, you misunderstood me. 61:14 Is talking about pre-Paul. To those who disbelived appeared as they slew Yasua ibn Mariam.
no i didnt 61:14 wouldnt make any sense then Ghaith it doesnt say for a couple of years your followers will be uppermost. it says they will be uppermost period and it goes with 3:55 thats a perfect fit in puzzle
They dont know the real paul, the Homosexual that hijacked Christianity
Not even the quran says any such thing that paul would become uppermost if he was disbeliever! and im sure you could prove that paul is homosexual as easily as i could prove muhammad was a bisexual.
We need to look at the time, 9:30 is talking about Christians in the time of Prophet Muhammad when they adapted the Gods son doctrine.
BS Ghaith the christians always believed jesus was son of god even the non trinitarians like the arians- it didnt happen during mos lifetime- that is ridiculous.
Same with Jews. You dont hear jews today saying Ezra is son of god, even if i have heard a jew say it before its not common.
Jews never have believed ezra was the son of god the encyclopedia judaica article that many muslims post on their website is entirely out of context-
The jewish dr simply quotes a muslim writing from yemen in tenth century that says jews used to believe ezra was son of god yet the muslim provided no evidence - he just wrote it because the quran says this.
I believe i explained this too you a while back- but mo might have misunderstood the hebrew word banou meaning messenger with the word ibnou meaning son- Often mo would hear judaized arabs recite torah and prophets in hebrew- and he would get lost explaining these silly errors in quran
Or it is possible that muhammad was making an equivelancy argument by saying the jews were just like the christians- this was amongst his last revelations he already subdued the jewish tribes of hijaz.
We know Paul was desperate for follower, that why he took a bit from Mithraism to trick the pagans in.
Huh No roman mithraism didnt even get in the picture until 75 or more years after paul died
That the biggest bs ive heard any 1 say. And the most biased Christian shcolar would laught at you if you said that
Ghaith you just exposed your own ignorance again- almost every christian calls the four gospel accounts as one gospel and the epistles supplement the gospels therefore, it is seen as ONE GOSPEL that is fact same with torah technically it is only first five books but the prophets had their basis on torah so the tanakh or ot can be seen as THE TORAH.
Regardless what Paul said in his book any 1 who is educated on this matter nows the churche choose what books to be and what books to not be.This is why There are 66 books in the protestant bible and 73 in the catholic
They chose books that were already seen as inspired by christian writers going to first century- augustine believed that those 7 OT books that were eventually added in catholic canon were LESS INSPIRED but he believed they should be in there- in any case the NT is the same
Where did you leave out Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary Mag? Secret Gospel of Mark?. I am being fair and did not include barnabas in this section. Haha silly
That Garbage NT is not Injil.
Because those gospels were written long after the first four and couldnt have possibly be written by supposed authors. even then dont you realize that many of those books are FAR MORE TRINITARIAN FRIENDLY if the gospel of thomas and the apocalypse of paul and letter to magnesiuns you have statements supposedly of jesus telling his disciples that he is the GOD and creator. even athanasius knew those books were fraudulent- because they were not mentioned by 2nd century writers despite the fact those books would have put trinity case to rest.
Not if the pagan god was also regarded as Christos.
For arguments sake- lets say its not spurious- pliny was not a christian- what do you expect him to say about christians or jesus?
No historical Jesus exists, same with Paul.
Wrong if that were the case then just as strong a case can be made for mo using your logic.
Didnt Abu Bakr, Omar, Uthman, Ali exist? This did exist without a doubt because they went to war with Byzantine and with Persians.
My point was if a small number of scholars scrutinize their existence =that means they must not have ACCORDING TO YOUR LOGIC.
Also we have Muhammads, belongings, We have his Hair, teeth, footstep etc.
No you don't! if thats the case catholics and orthodoax believe they have the bones of various apostles of jesus.
Any 1 who say Muhammad didnt exist is an Idiot.
Just like any1 who denies the existence of a historical jesus
Also Muhammad didnt exist myth was laid to rest by Petra Sijpesteijn
Actually i believe a historical muhammad existed i was just using a counter argument showing you how flawed your logic is Ghaith. Interesting link here Ghaith i especially agree with the last part of link you provided
Even so, her discoveries form a potential threat to the image some modern Muslims have of their history. The papyri contradict the belief held by many of today’s Muslims that Muhammad delivered Islam as a sort of ready-made package. “It looks as though Islam in its first centuries developed a form gradually. There was an awful lot of discussion about precisely what it meant to be a Muslim.”
I have always believed this to be the case- so i like this petra for proving this.
apyrus manuscripts have been found in their thousands in the sand and at ancient rubbish tips all over the Middle East but especially in Egypt. Dr Sijpesteijn explains that they are often difficult to read because they are partially destroyed, badly written out or in dialect. “But if you can read them, they offer a unique glimpse of ordinary life at the dawn of Islam.”
The study of Arabic papyri is in its infancy. Only a fraction of the hundreds of thousands of available manuscripts have been studied. As far as the work done so far is concerned, the Muslim faithful can set their minds at ease: Dr Sijpesteijn says the texts largely confirm the official Islamic version of events.
She German to.
So is muhammad sven kalisch in fact he was germanyd first muslim scholar.
And where did you leave out non-islamic sources such as Sebeos
I didnt leave him out even though the earliest mss of any of sebeos works dont survive before the seventeenth century (see how that can be scrutinized)
And what about Hadiths 200years after Muhammad with solid Chains to the time of Muhammad.
it would be easy for a skeptic to say the chains were made up!
sorry Kai a Historical Muhammad exists without a doubt, Jesus dont neither do Paul.
I proved that they are the same
Ive already showen Josephus inaccuracy of the bible and he only spoke of a Jesus known then, not a historical one, the bible states his brother was James
Josephus inaccuracies dont prove josephus was not a writer writing in first century about jesus. Yes the bible states that again proving the bible was in existence BEFORE josephus.
And Pliny you your self dont want to recognize the same of the early Christians, and the other are heavily edited.
I recognize pliny just some of his quotes seem to be spurious. heavily edited like that sebeos quote LMAO
That what Josephus said.
I agree that IS WHAT JOSEPHUS SAID
Its a major excuse, if not post the Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic text here and show me they state the same numbers on Solomons stall etc.
I thought we were talkin about 10,000 talents verses 100,000 talents. i will look into it.
Im going to watch this Zeitgeist movie and i will se how we view it different.
Im surprised you never watched that it's right up your alley part 2 is about 9/11 cuke theories- and it proves that moses jesus etc.. never existed. you know all that stuff muslims believe.
If you have adhd yeah sure.
His not the best writer of AC, but he is decent.
Decent at lying
Wouldnt you, 2 debater against you + a room full of Christian who attack you.
I wouldnt be surprised if osama had that planned out- in any case i would never attack anyones family i do insult back if im insulted- believe me my family has been insulted by several muslims online- i do insult them but never against their families they might have good families it is not their childrens or wives fault for how they are.
Not using words like Sam did.
Now we are back at what words is worse
This is so juvenile
yes you hate naik because he rips your bible apart
No because he is a compuldive deliberate liar.