Welcome Anonymous, It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:54 pm                    >>Main Site<<

A challenge to yos on did muslims or qurysh draw first blood

Invite one or more persons you want to have exclusive debate with by name. Only those whom you invite will be allowed to post here. Others will be removed if you ask the moderators.

Re: A challenge to Ghaith on did muslims or qurysh draw firs

Postby kaimana1 » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:11 pm

You gotta check out my stuff kai


:lol1:



If you accept that argument. then you must accept the argument that moses and Muhammad grew man BOOBS according to the quran :lotpot:

Anyways hit me up with an email once you have replied.


Il get around little mono just I am you will get around.
User avatar
kaimana1
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:46 am
Gender: Male

Re: A challenge to Ghaith on did muslims or qurysh draw firs

Postby monotheism » Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:37 am

Hello kai.

Mono... mo knew what he called "the nasara" had the injeel and the torah. Not once did he or his quran say the torah was corrupted much less by the Pharisees.

Narrated Ubaidullah: "Ibn 'Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!" (S Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)"

The quran is NOT clear on many issues my dear mono whether in Arabic or English. Iv'e learned quite a bit over the years mono.

Its not clear to you because you wear the ignorance glasses when you read it.

You miss the point - why would ghandi transport himself to 1000 bc Israel to worship khrishna?

Its an exampel kai. Im sure polytheists existed and where killed under Solomon or Davids rule.

Because you don't want to.

ohh?

You mean the corrupted jewish view mono. Hmmm

its the jewish view kai.

Are you kidding me mono??? that was a god awful example
Dhul-kifl has no correlation with the name Ezekiel whatsoever mono- while many mufassir believed dhul khifl was Ezekiel - some were not sure- some believe it was Obadiah and I believe al- qutba believed it was Isaiah (ahmadis believe dhul khifl was Siddhartha Gautama) The word in Arabic that corresponds to Ezekiel is HIZ'QUL- that is why there is so much confusion about dhil khufl mono-because it doesn't correspond in any way to Ezekiel .
As for Mahomet that is the Turkish pronounciation of mo simple as that- those Barbary pirates in Libya and Algeria were vassals of the ottomans- so when American diplomats referred to muslims and Muhammad they woulkd use Turkish pronounciation.

I agree some say Isaiah other Ezekiel

Turks had alot of ponounciation the Muhammad that conquered constantinople was caled Mahmed.

Lastly, didn't you know that many muslims at that time would call themselves muhammadens?

they still do today kai.

Was this prophet joseph smith using Turkish pronounciation??

Joseph Smith is not a prophet he did use the term Mahomet yes.

answered you above

Ohh?

You are attacking strawman here mono I didn't make that argument. And you are going to tell me there is no YOD in Hebrew. maybe you meant there is no y or j in koine greek which is true- that is why they used iesous for jesus

Not really attacking a strawman Jesus spoke Aramaic and most likely had an Aramaic name. In Aramaic Eesho would be Eesa in some dialect.

in any case yasu or yeshua certainly is the correct pronounciatian -greek and English are NOT semetic languages so the differences will be more glaring.

Can you bring me some historical evidence his name was in Yeshua?

Mo is not a derogatory term- are you monotheistic to Muhammad or allah perhaps they are one in the same.?

be respectful.

That depends on how you selectively quote paul and jesus on various issues

No not really. If you dont twist any verses and read them as there written you will see clear contradictions. No wonder the epistle where written before the Gospels, the epistle where spread untill Marcion who is labeled as a gnoustic by many churches collected the epistle and made a canon.

The quran contradicts the torah and gospel even plenty of hades for that matter

The Gospel doesnt exist as a scripture and the toah is corrupted.

It doesn't matter mono. the concept of jesus the messiah born to a virgin comes from the Christians and there injeel

It can be seen historical and not as a Christian invention from an Islamic pov. Its a matter of faith.

did you read that link I provided by professor Abdullah saeed? anyways

I dont remember, but how is that relevant what 1 muslim says? Thats like apposing the belief of some Rabbis about Muhammad being a prophet on all Jews.

That is talking about 2:79

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi

(Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, “This is from Allah”…) [2:79]. This was revealed about those who had changed the description of the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, and altered his traits. Al-Kalbi mentioned, through the above-mentioned chain of transmission: “They had changed the description of Allah’s Messenger, Allah bless him and give him peace, in their Scripture. They made him white and tall while the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, was brown and of medium height. They had said to their followers and companions: ‘Look at the description of the prophet who will be sent at the end of time; his description does not match that of this [man]’. The Jewish rabbis and doctors used to gain some worldly benefits from the Jewish people and so they were afraid of losing this gain if they were ever to show the real description. It is for this reason that they had changed it”.


Can you show me the description in the Torah kai? If you cant than the Torah is corrupted by usin the logic from the tafsir about the description.

Lets emphacize on ibn abbas tafsir on 5:68

They can use the book even if its corrupted kai like the laws in the torah about stonning.

Theres many more but

Since that one didnt do bring the many other.

The quran alludes to their present scripture repeatedly mono.

Yes and it being corrupted.

Most Christians believe it is a parallel prophecy regarding the 2nd temple destruction of Jerusalem and the end times.

Thats how christians try to answer it other say its talking about a future generation the truth is its an epic fail and a failed prophecy. unless you go as far fetched as chistians do.

So allegedly adam who was supposedly kicked down from paradise in heaven to earth because he disobeyed is sent down to earth as punishment along with his offspring to be was suddenly made a prophet?

Why is Allah called al rahman al rahim? Mankind makes mistakes.

His sexism which is so abundant in the muslim world and the quran and hades - get real mono also, what is up with paul giving timothy a good time- getting circumcised is a good time?? are you for real mono?

Those are factors and if it leads a Bishop like Spong to belive it than thats good enough to raise some eye browns.

yes im saying that Muhammad heard some of the jewish scribes refer to ezra as banu messenger.... and mo thought they were saying ibnu or son of

(And the Jews) the Jews of Medina (say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians) the Christians of Najran (say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths) with their tongues. (They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old) before them, i.e. the disbelievers of Mecca who said that al-Lat, al-'Uzza and Manat were His daughters, just as the Jews claimed that Ezra was the son of Allah and some of the Christians claimed that Jesus was the son of Allah, others that he was Allah's partner while there were others who said that he was Allah Himself or one god among three. (Allah (Himself) fights against them) Allah curses them. (How perverse are they!) from where do they get their lies?

I belief other held the view that Ezra was the messiah.

It says nasara for Christian not ebionite- so how do you know waraqa was an ebionite?

I got it from Encylopedia of Islam. It makes good sense. More sense then him being an Arian or Nestorian.

It doesn't matter because they had their gospel which many experts believe was the gospel of matthew.

Based on papias Matthew and Irenaeus was writte in Hebrew. Based on Eusebius of Caesarea the ebionites used Gospel of the Hebrews.

The ebionites had gospel of matthew in hebrew which is different from the Greek one as ebionites reject the vigin birth and Matthew contradicts the Ebionite belief.

or the gospel which contained all four in one.

No scholar would make this dumb claim kai. He must be mentaly retarded to think the ebionites would accept the filty gospel of john.

The gospel of the Hebrews and Nazarenes mentioned that jesus was baptized by john the Baptist. islam doesn't even recognize baptism. Nestorians were somewhat common in Arabia at that time they adhere to the peshitta. so prove that waraqa was NOT a nestorian

Bahira the monk saw the description of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) in the christian book if he refered to the peshitta or not that would proof that the canon they had in Aabia was different then those that followed the nicean creed had.

That makes sense that the copts would use a word derived from the greek to use for the gospel. what I was saying was why not use the Arabic equivelant of the Aramaic ha bishara for the gospel?


Image


You?? You mean shabir ally? well Christians made their 101 contradictions cleared up- anyways the thirty gospels have you seen them ? like the gospel of Thomas which says jesus was GOD in those words as well as many others. If I was a Trinitarian in those days I would have made sure those gospels were canonized. but they didn't mono.

Just like Mormons cleared up the failed prophecies of Joseph Smith? No i dont think so. The poor answers christians gave to most of them where laugheble.

Really so you have become an ibn abbas fan?

im a fan of many tafsirs.

If vague is clear then sure

Come on kai be respect full.

Abdullah smith who got crushed about his jesus had female breasts article???? LOL

Crushed? Katz only answer was bring a text from Homer containing the word Mazon not even in the form as in rev 1:13 mastoi. Abdullah Smith beheaded Katz in his rebutal.

Did you see the context of why sam was saying that? go back and look.

Did you ead the other Hadith concering that event that used different arabic words?

“Don't trouble me regarding 'Aisha, for by Allah, the Divine Inspiration never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman amongst you except her." (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3491)

Sam Shamoun is an dishonest moron who mostly bases his hate on Islam because of his bad experiance as a member of the nation of Islam.

Nadir is like that with anyone he talks to. he is a very manipulative personality did you see him crop that video about the rationalizer saying Muhammad prophecied correctly?

LMAO I suggest you go to the jinn and tonic show and check out the unedited version.

Watched the video yeah. Not really a fan of atheists.

Havent I explained this to you before? 1 john 5:7 was not in ANY original mss it was obviously a confusion of a footnote from Athanasius being mistaken as part of the verse.

1 verse=corruption Kai there not but it was from a this and maybe the scribe included that.

Those nuts are not mainstream Christians mono, not even marginal read the verses it says everything I portrayed. you don't put god to the test that is Christianity 101

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God." (2 Timothy 3:16)
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless...." (2 Samuel 22:31)
"And the words of the LORD are flawless...." (Psalm 12:6)
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless...." (Psalm 18:30)
"Every word of God is flawless...." (Proverbs 30:5)
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
(1 Corinthians 14:33)

Mark 16:17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;


Where does it say Apostles/Deciples can you show me?

No they are not mono- moiz amjad obviously knows nothing of hadith- there are numerous chains directly from Aisha through mecca and medina and Palestine even.

Ok kai bring me some exampels.I do accept the hadith regardless if its from Iraq or not im just showing its problematic.

No it came from shia accusations of sunnis.

Shias are worse then the Christians kai.

HMMM NO

So decide does the Talmud or the Tosafots mention jesus or not?

3:93-94

The bible is al kitab so mono I guess that sadistic monster god is going to burn you forever and ever for refusing to believe in ALL his books.


Can you show me the word kitab in sura 3:93-94?

كُلُّ ٱلطَّعَامِ ڪَانَ حِلاًّ۬ لِّبَنِىٓ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلَ إِلَّا مَا حَرَّمَ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلُ عَلَىٰ نَفۡسِهِۦ مِن قَبۡلِ أَن تُنَزَّلَ ٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةُ‌ۗ قُلۡ فَأۡتُواْ بِٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةِ فَٱتۡلُوهَآ إِن كُنتُمۡ صَـٰدِقِينَ

ٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةُ‌ۗ is Taurat meaning the Torah not al Kitab.

In the Arabic sense they were mono yes. the sons of Israel included yehuud mono.

when did the term Jew come kai?
800 after Moses?


so you are saying you will not believe in jesus shortly???

come on kai.
monotheism
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:06 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: A challenge to Ghaith on did muslims or qurysh draw firs

Postby monotheism » Sun Dec 23, 2012 2:04 pm

Okay so you believe god put someone in jesus place to suffer?

Correct.

Because the councils knew they were not written by the claimed author.

Who where the councils to decide what to include and what to not include :lol:

He believed that the earlier books became corrupted after Muhammad of course without any evidence.

plenty of evidence.

all of those books were included in the peshitta by 200 years before mo

Not in the first Peshitta kai.

Christian simply means follower of Christ which in turn means messiah hence AL masihi

The meaning of Christianos is not totally clear but seems to mean an adherent of Christ. Some think this is a diminutive form of Christos, meaning "little Christ." Irregardless Christianos connects a believer with his Lord.
http://preceptaustin.org/1peter_verse_b ... 410-19.htm

Constantine claimed to be a Christian.

Constantine wasnt baptists and the myth that he was baptists was by an Arian not even a Catholic.

whats with this smokescreen mono? didn't you know that Constantine became an arian Christian after council of nicea? I never believed the Pharisees believed in trinity. they didn't even believe jesus was the messiah.

Im talking about the Jews who where from the linage of Benjamin or Juda or Reuben. Can you prove to me these became trinitarians and follower Tertullians doctrine?
No smoke screan Yes i know about Constantine, and his son was a aian to and supported Arianism. but i dont belive Constantine was a christians at all rather i belive he died a pagan.

HMMM???

To get neutral opinions.

Yes but not THE messiah as your quran agrees with was jesus.

thats right Kai.

Ah yes the context . Its talking about Christians who become muslims im glad you saved me from digging up those tafsir.

Its not talking about christians and Jews today kai, so if i prefer Non-zionist jews over those christians that follow the nicean creed than its not against the Quran little kai.

I hope the muslim claiming to be joseph the Yemeni jew isn't acting in this one LMAO

I meet Joseph on paltalk :lol:

Mono obviously we are going in circles on this I am in no mood to explain that to you again.

What are you going to explain to me Kai. It says Bani Israel meaning bloodline of Jacob. If it did want to adress the Romans it would have used the word Nasara or not even included bani Israel.

It says some jews.

Mark 14:61 Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?”

Are you telling me the high priest had an orthodox view on the messiah come on kai your just desperate now.

why would he?

Im giving you an exampel that the Jesus of the gospel didnt predict anything seeing as the Gospels date to 2nd century after the temples fall. And dont tell me what scholars say about 60adbecause historical evidence and carbon dating proves otherwise Thomas even predates Mark.

Rather you should say when you are READY to accept the evidence.

What evidence?

Average?? Yeah I agree Hezbollah has turned southern Beirut into an oppressive hell hole.

Majosi Rafidas are not muslims kai. rather than making takfir on them i do on their scholars and ayatollahs.

BS mono a couple of years ago I was on one of his websites it was jihad deluxe. why do you think he moved to yemen?

Jihad delux isnt freespeach? But Pamela Gellers war against muslims is? Come on kai its free speech which he was killed for in another country.

Wrong ive already showed you why?

No not really 777 and 666 is just as understandble as Nero killing Christians and him being the beast.

Please post the verse

Judges 9:8 The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive-tree: Reign thou over us.

Enlighten me?


In Cave 4, 157 fragmentary biblical texts were retrieved, among which is every book of the Hebrew canon, save Esther (and Nehemi- ah, which at that time was considered as one book with Ezra). Eventually, these Cave 4 fragments revealed a different story about the copying and transmission of Old Testament writings. In some cases, especially 1-2 Samuel, Jeremiah, and Exodus, the fragments brought to light forms or recensions of biblical books that differed from the medieval Masoretic tradition. For instance, one text turned out to be a shorter Hebrew form of Jeremiah, previously known only in its Greek version in the Septuagint. It now seems that the fuller form of Masoretic tradition represents a Palestinian rewording of the book. Another from Cave 4, written in paleo- Hebrew script and dated from the early second century B.C., con- tains the repetitious expanded form of Exodus previously known only in Samaritan writings, ("The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible: After Forty Years," America, October 31, 1987, p. 302

No they don't

Dr Puin.
The important thing, thank God, is that these Yemeni Qur'anic fragments do not differ from those found in museums and libraries elsewhere, with the exception of details that do not touch the Qur'an itself, but are rather differences in the way words are spelled. This phenomenon is well-known, even in the Qur'an published in Cairo in which is written:

Ibrhim next to Ibrhm
Quran next to Qrn
Simahum next to Simhum

In the oldest Yemeni Qur'anic fragments, for example, the phenomenon of not writing the vowel alif is rather common."

They really do kai.

That story is disputed but yeah the very same ibn ishaq that is also a major basis of the sealed nectar.

Ibn ishaq is a joke.

IDK but what I do know is that naik is a fraud he will debate little know Christian pastors in india where 300 people don't even know. but he wont debate sam shamoun who is far more well known.

How do you know that Pastor is little known? And how is scam paltalk shamoun known at all. He couldnt even get a 2k audience kai.

What question?

If i remember correctly Nadit asked him what right hand possesion what and cp ignored it.

I quit going there two years ago I was getting booted off too much .

Thats a shame Kai.

As for the videos you posted of that Filipino catholic sect that nails themselves to crosses as nutty as it is they do that on their own accord. there is no evidence of them hurting anyone outside of their sect. and they get proselytized all the time by other Christians. so why would they not accept it by muslims. its nothing like the treatment ahmadiyas get in Indonesia by sunnis.

You sure they wouldnt gotten the same treatment as David wood did Kai?

if you accept that argument. then you must accept the argument that moses and Muhammad grew man BOOBS according to the quran

?
monotheism
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:06 pm
Gender: None specified

Re: A challenge to Ghaith on did muslims or qurysh draw firs

Postby kaimana1 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:54 pm

Hi mono

Narrated Ubaidullah: "Ibn 'Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!" (S Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)"

well, obviously this hadee is referring to 2:79 of quran but when you look at the context of 2:79, as we discussed before it is clear that this hadith does not take 2:75-78 into consideration.

Ibn Kathir writes:

Mujahid. Ash-Sha'bi, Al-Hassan, Qatadah and Ar-Rabi' bin Anas said that,

<who distort the Book with their tongues.>

means, "They alter (Allah's Words)."

Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn 'Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah's creation CAN REMOVE THE WORDS OF ALLAH FROM HIS BOOKS, THEY ALTER AND DISTORT THEIR APPARENT MEANINGS. Wahb bin Munabbih said, "The Tawrah and Injil REMAIN AS ALLAH REVEALED THEM, AND NO LETTER IN THEM WAS REMOVED. However, the people misguide others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves." Then,

<they say: "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah;>

As for Allah's books, THEY ARE STILL PRESERVED AND CANNOT BE CHANGED." Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this statement ... (Tafsir Ibn Kathir – Abridged, Volume 2, Parts 3, 4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, verse 147
check this out as well

http://bewley.virtualave.net/bukhari52.html

LV. The words of Allah Almighty, "It is indeed a Glorious Qur'an preserved on a Tablet." (85:21-22)

"By the Mount and an Inscribed Book" (52:1-2): Qatada said that "mastur" means "written". "Yasturun" (68:1) means "they inscribe", and the Umm al-Kitab (43:4) is the whole of the Qur'an and its source. [He said that] "ma talfizu" (50:18) means: "He does not say anything but that it is written against him." Ibn 'Abbas said, "Both good and evil are recorded," and "yuharrufuna" (4:46) means "they remove". No one removes the works [sic] of one of the Books of Allah Almighty, but they twist them, interpreting them improperly. "Dirasatihim: (6:156) means "their recitation" "Wa'iyya" (69:12) is preserving, "ta'iha" (69:12) means to "preserve it". "This Qur'an has been revealed to me by inspiration that I may warn you," meaning the people of Makka, "and all whom it reaches"(6:19) meaning this Qur'an, so he is its warner.
And Did you forget this hadith mono?

Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the GOSPELS in Arabic ... (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605)


Its not clear to you because you wear the ignorance glasses when you read it.


And you don't??? you can't help but be biased towards the qur'an despite the fact it calims its verses are clear 41:3- you have come up with nothing but mostly unsubstantiated theories and excuses mono.

Its an exampel kai. Im sure polytheists existed and where killed under Solomon or Davids rule.


It was a poor example mono- anyways show the proof of that- it is true if an israelite worshipped other gods then yes they could be killed according to mosaic law.






I agree some say Isaiah other Ezekiel

very well
Turks had alot of ponounciation the Muhammad that conquered constantinople was caled Mahmed.


Turks still pronounce the d in muhammad as a english t

they still do today kai.


You are one of the first muslims i talked to to acknowledge that :clap:




Ohh?


Yep i did lilttle buddy

Not really attacking a strawman Jesus spoke Aramaic and most likely had an Aramaic name. In Aramaic Eesho would be Eesa in some dialect.


Wrong, in aramaic yeshua is spelled yod-shin-waw-`ayn (Y$W3) whereas the quran the spelling of Yeshoo`a.
Qur'aanic `Eesaa is quite different, in that it starts with an `ayn- c,mon mono

Can you bring me some historical evidence his name was in Yeshua?


sure
check out British Library, Add. 14470

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Library,_Add._14470

This contains the entire new testament it was written around the 400s and 500s that is before muhammad.


No not really. If you dont twist any verses and read them as there written you will see clear contradictions. No wonder the epistle where written before the Gospels, the epistle where spread untill Marcion who is labeled as a gnoustic by many churches collected the epistle and made a canon.


You dont have your ignorance glasses on now ? :nono:

The Gospel doesnt exist as a scripture and the toah is corrupted.


Mono you are in deep denial to say the quran denies that. look up 7:157-170


It can be seen historical and not as a Christian invention from an Islamic pov. Its a matter of faith.


Actually, i agree with that- just that the faith part is an understatement.

I dont remember, but how is that relevant what 1 muslim says? Thats like apposing the belief of some Rabbis about Muhammad being a prophet on all Jews.


Abdullah saeed brought up many valid points. he is not a fringe crackpot abdullah saeed is a professor and a muslim . As for the jews who say muhammad was a prophet to everyone except jews are illiterate- or just simply want to make life easier on themselves amongst the basiji.

Asbab Al-Nuzul by Al-Wahidi

(Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, “This is from Allah”…) [2:79]. This was revealed about those who had changed the description of the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, and altered his traits. Al-Kalbi mentioned, through the above-mentioned chain of transmission: “They had changed the description of Allah’s Messenger, Allah bless him and give him peace, in their Scripture. They made him white and tall while the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, was brown and of medium height. They had said to their followers and companions: ‘Look at the description of the prophet who will be sent at the end of time; his description does not match that of this [man]’. The Jewish rabbis and doctors used to gain some worldly benefits from the Jewish people and so they were afraid of losing this gain if they were ever to show the real description. It is for this reason that they had changed it”.


Can you show me the description in the Torah kai? If you cant than the Torah is corrupted by usin the logic from the tafsir about the description.


That is ridiculous mono- That tafsir is mere conjecture- you see, i know the mufassir were muslims and would make excuses and try to cover up blunders of the quran etc.. but it's amazing how much many of them expose islam as a fraud while they do it. Btw are you aware of the hadith in bukharis book the description of the prophets where jesus is described as being red Hence the term ISA no doubt this might be where deedat thought esau was same as isa.

They can use the book even if its corrupted kai like the laws in the torah about stonning.


Gods words never change mono. this is quran teaching101


Since that one didnt do bring the many other.


I brought several, yet you ignore them mono so why waste my time?

Yes and it being corrupted.

No, that is your word mono not qurans


Thats how christians try to answer it other say its talking about a future generation the truth is its an epic fail and a failed prophecy. unless you go as far fetched as chistians do.


You feel that way because you are muslim.


Why is Allah called al rahman al rahim? Mankind makes mistakes.


Yet , unbelievers will roast in hellfire with their skin being burned off and the sadomasochistic allah making new skin so he can burn it off again. WAKE UP MONO.

Those are factors and if it leads a Bishop like Spong to belive it than thats good enough to raise some eye browns.


He is only one man mono- be consistent with your logic . muhammad sven kalisch raised some eyebrows too.


I belief ot
(And the Jews) the Jews of Medina (say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians) the Christians of Najran (say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths) with their tongues. (They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old) before them, i.e. the disbelievers of Mecca who said that al-Lat, al-'Uzza and Manat were His daughters, just as the Jews claimed that Ezra was the son of Allah and some of the Christians claimed that Jesus was the son of Allah, others that he was Allah's partner while there were others who said that he was Allah Himself or one god among three. (Allah (Himself) fights against them) Allah curses them. (How perverse are they!) from where do they get their lies?


Wrong mono ALL christians whether they were arian, monophysite , or majority trinitarian believe that jesus was the son of god. While there is not a single iota of evidence of any jews even in medina believing ezra was the messiah. 9:30 Does not say "the jews of medina" Nor does it say SOME christians. The quran is correct about the christians. but in total error about the yehudah.. if it wanted to say some jews it would say a party of jews believed that but it doesnt.

Nice try nevertheless.


I got it from Encylopedia of Islam. It makes good sense. More sense then him being an Arian or Nestorian.


Well there was no arians in arabia they didnt believe jesus was god- ebionites believed jesus was the son of god in an adoptive way. they didnt believe in virgin birth. but i still believe waraqa was a nestorian because the hadees i showed you say waraqa would translate the GOSPELS plural. ebionites only used one gospel account as their gospel.


Based on papias Matthew and Irenaeus was writte in Hebrew. Based on Eusebius of Caesarea the ebionites used Gospel of the Hebrews.


You mean matthew was originally written in hebrew? That was disputed back then- iraneus believed the gospel of hebrews was matthew. Either way the ebionites used one gospel account.

The ebionites had gospel of matthew in hebrew which is different from the Greek one as ebionites reject the vigin birth and Matthew contradicts the Ebionite belief.


No scholar would make this dumb claim kai. He must be mentaly retarded to think the ebionites would accept the filty gospel of john.


We have learned from none others the plan of salvation, than from those through whom THE GOSPEL has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed ‘perfect knowledge,’ as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles. For, after our Lord rose from the dead, [the apostles] were invested with power from on high when the Holy Spirit came [upon them], were filled from all [His gifts], and had perfect knowledge: they departed to the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things [sent] from God to us, and proclaiming peace of heaven to men, who indeed do all equally and individually POSSESS THE GOSPEL OF GOD. Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book THE GOSPEL preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia. ANF, Vol. 1, Against Heresies 3.1.1. (David T. King and William Webster, Holy Scriptures, The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, Volume III, The Writings of the Church Fathers Affirming the Reformation Principle of Sola Scriptura [Christian Resources - 1505 NW 4th Avenue - BattleGround, WA 98604], p. 17




Bahira the monk saw the description of the Prophet Muhammad (saw) in the christian book if he refered to the peshitta or not that would proof that the canon they had in Aabia was different then those that followed the nicean creed had.


That amounts to no proof whatsoever.. that was muslim wishful thinking.



Image


That proves nothing whatsoever- Of course in greek gospel is evangelion .

I am saying that the quranic word injeel comes from that greek word

[url]
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D9% ... 9%8A%D9%84[/url]

and
http://www.bayynat.org.lb/

says
إنّ كلمة الأناجيل كلمة يونانية تعني الخبر السار
The word Anajeel [lit. Gospels; Anajeel is the plural form of the singular Injeel] is a Greek word which means "good news".



Just like Mormons cleared up the failed prophecies of Joseph Smith? No i dont think so. The poor answers christians gave to most of them where laugheble.


Not as laughable as muslims clearing up contradictions and errors in the quran

im a fan of many tafsirs.


Hmmm




Crushed? Katz only answer was bring a text from Homer containing the word Mazon not even in the form as in rev 1:13 mastoi. Abdullah Smith beheaded Katz in his rebutal.


Not really, all abdullah did was come up with a theory about revelation being inclusive of all sexes. did you catch that bassam zawadi agreed with katz about the passage about breasts? Basam made a dunce of himself when he ignored katz footnote explaining that he only used the allah was enlarging moses and muhammads breasts to show that you could use the same words for it. using abdullahs logic. bassam didnt read that- and wasted two articles about it. LOL




Sam Shamoun is an dishonest moron who mostly bases his hate on Islam because of his bad experiance as a member of the nation of Islam.


He was never a member of NOI he almost became one but he didnt. It could be his experience with many muslims threatening his wife etc...




1 verse=corruption Kai there not but it was from a this and maybe the scribe included that.


That is not corruption when it is caught.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God." (2 Timothy 3:16)
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless...." (2 Samuel 22:31)
"And the words of the LORD are flawless...." (Psalm 12:6)
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless...." (Psalm 18:30)
"Every word of God is flawless...." (Proverbs 30:5)
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
(1 Corinthians 14:33)

Mark 16:17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;


Where does it say Apostles/Deciples can you show me?


Verse 14 says jesus went before the eleven those were jesus apostles mono. It isnt confusing actually, some will get bitten by snakes and not be hurt. Have you heard of miracles mono?

The quran believes it.


Ok kai bring me some exampels.I do accept the hadith regardless if its from Iraq or not im just showing its problematic.


They are mutawatir or mass-transmitted mono
Aishah → Al-Aswad → Ibraheem → Al-A’amash→ Abu Mua’awiyah → Yahya ibn
Yahya, Ishaaq ibn Ibraheem, Abu Bakr ibn Abee Shaibah and Abu Kuraib → Muslim
Aishah ( رضي الله عنها ) narrated that the Messenger of Allah () married her when she
was six years old and lived with her when she was nine years old and he died when
she was eighteen years old

That is in muslims sahih did you notice hisham ibn urwa is not in the chain

Here are some in abu dawoods sunan

Aishah → Yahya (ibn Abdur Rahmaan ibn Haatib) → Muhammad (ibn Amr) → the
father of U’baidullah ibn Muadh → Ubaidullah ibn Muadh → Abu Dawood
Yahya (ibn Abdur Rahman ibn Haatib) narrated that Aishah ( رضي الله عنها ) said: “I
came to Madeenah and resided at (the house of) Bani Al-Harith ibn Al-Khazraj.”
Then she (Aishah) said: “By Allah, I was playing on a swing that was tied between
two palm trees. At the time, my hair reached my ears. So my mother came and took
me down from the swing and took me, so they fixed me (beautified me and dressed me
in proper clothing) then sent me to the Prophet () who then consummated the
marriage while I was nine years old.”
No hisham ibn urwa
also from abu dawoods sunan
Aishah → Abu Salamah ibn Abdur Rahman → Muhammad ibn Ibraheem → I’mara
ibn Ghazya → Yahya ibn Ayub → the paternal uncle of Ahmad ibn Sa’d ibn Al-
Hakam ibn Abee Maryam → Ahmad ibn Sa’d ibn Al-Hakam ibn Abee Maryam →
An-Nasaaee
Abu Salama Bin Abdulrahman narrated from Aishah ( رضي الله عنها ) that the Messenger
of Allah () married her when she was six years old and lived with her when she was nine
years old.

That is just a couple also hisham ibn urwa related the hadith to several madinah scholars before he had any memory loss

Shias are worse then the Christians kai.


Really?

So decide does the Talmud or the Tosafots mention jesus or not?


They mention yeshua FOR SURE - but it is hard to determine which ones were refering to the messiah-
3:93-94



Can you show me the word kitab in sura 3:93-94?

كُلُّ ٱلطَّعَامِ ڪَانَ حِلاًّ۬ لِّبَنِىٓ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلَ إِلَّا مَا حَرَّمَ إِسۡرَٲٓءِيلُ عَلَىٰ نَفۡسِهِۦ مِن قَبۡلِ أَن تُنَزَّلَ ٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةُ‌ۗ قُلۡ فَأۡتُواْ بِٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةِ فَٱتۡلُوهَآ إِن كُنتُمۡ صَـٰدِقِينَ

ٱلتَّوۡرَٮٰةُ‌ۗ is Taurat meaning the Torah not al Kitab.


I know mono - you said torah was corrupted the verse proves it wasnt.

Anyways do i really have to show you how many times kitab is used - i know you know what i am referring to why are you playing this game?


when did the term Jew come kai?
800 after Moses?


It was actually used to describe the israelites from the tribe of judah then after the northern kingdom was destroyed the term became usable for ALL israelites.
User avatar
kaimana1
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:46 am
Gender: Male

Re: A challenge to Ghaith on did muslims or qurysh draw firs

Postby kaimana1 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:03 pm

Il be back to reply to the rest.
User avatar
kaimana1
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:46 am
Gender: Male

Previous

Return to Exclusive Rooms - One-on-One-Debates

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 150 on Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:52 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Info

The team
Delete all board cookies
• All times are UTC [ DST ]