Calling all former Muslims!

[dzheremi]

Why is what you’ve pointed out a problem, Analyzer? I don’t think you understood my post. There is no problem here but the one you’ve created for yourself. For Christians, it doesn’t exist, for the reasons I gave in my other post.

Also, doesn’t the footnote you quoted give a probable reason why it appears in Hebrew in one Gospel and in Aramaic in another? I don’t think this is evidence of anything other than what is suggested there (though I am personally okay with admitting that I do not have a conclusive answer for you), and it is certainly NOT evidence of truth in your fantasies regarding the “corrupted” nature of the Bible.

 

[Analyzer]

BTW, for your information, if ELOI of Aramaic means ‘My God’…look how similar is this word with an Arabic Word “ELAHI” which also means ‘My God’.

 

[Angelos]

Salaam/peace

The fools among the people will say:
What has turned them from their qiblah which they had?

Say: The East and the West belong only to Allah; He guides whom He likes to the right path

[2.142]

According to this verse, it is FOOLISHNESS to choose a specific direction for prayer since all directions belong to God!

 

[Angelos]

Why is what you’ve pointed out a problem, Analyzer? I don’t think you understood my post. There is no problem here but the one you’ve created for yourself. For Christians, it doesn’t exist, for the reasons I gave in my other post.

Also, doesn’t the footnote you quoted give a probable reason why it appears in Hebrew in one Gospel and in Aramaic in another? I don’t think this is evidence of anything other than what is suggested there (though I am personally okay with admitting that I do not have a conclusive answer for you), and it is certainly NOT evidence of truth in your fantasies regarding the “corrupted” nature of the Bible.

You are getting to know multiple face Muslim poster named Analyser! Copying from some Bible commentaries to devise irrelevant posts is his bad habit.

 

[dzheremi]

BTW, for your information, if ELOI of Aramaic means ‘My God’…look how similar is this word with an Arabic Word “ELAHI” which also means ‘My God’.

And for YOUR information, I already know this and still don’t see how it proves any kind of point at all. Of course they’re related. Aramaic and Arabic are both Semitic languages. So what.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

What difference does it make which way we face when we pray? If you consider that a miracle, you haven’t the faintest idea of what a real miracle is any more than the Muslim who claims to have found the words “Allah” and "Muhammad in a rotten mango, unless it goes to prove that “by their fruits you will know them”!


Vickie

LOL (to be fair, I class seeing the Theotokos in a tortilla in this category).

Reminds me of an incident while I was in Egypt: a Coptic friend of mine and I were waiting for a Muslim friend to finish his prayers in the Mosque. Someone walked up and asked us (in English, although my friend was 100% Copt/Egyptian he is very white. I had help from my Teutonic ancestors )“Do you want to see a miracle.” Before we could answer, he pulled out an unripe date, and then proceeded to point out to us every nook and krany to spell out the Muslim creed. He then just exclaiming 'It’s a miracle! It’s a miracle!" and then walked away.

My friend and I were dumb struck, and couldn’t say anything, just looking at each other for several minutes before we burst out laughing.

“I guess the only thing left,” he said, “is that we go in and convert.”

 

[rikkk1958]

I wish to ask Planten and Muslim Woman what sect in Islam do they belong?

 

[Analyzer]

…you haven’t the faintest idea of what a real miracle is any more …

Vickie

**First, who cares/seeks “real” miracles/signs"?

“A wicked and (unfaithfull) adulterous generation seeketh after a sign.”

"Unfaithful: literally, “adulterous.” The covenant between God and Israel was portrayed as a marriage bond, and unfaithfulness to the covenant as adultery; cf ⇒ Hosea 2:4-14; ⇒ Jeremiah 3:6-10.

**
But the only miracle/sign Jesus was prepared to show/give was not even fulfilled as per the understanding given to us by the majority of Christiandom, as for them Jesus was “crufcified” (actually curcificted) on Friday not on Wednesday.​

 

[planten]

The Qu’ran was penned more than 600 years after Christianity, and thousands of years after Judaism and Zoroastrianism. It even incorporates Gnostic Christian teachings, which mainstream Christianity denounced!

It’s odd that God would wait such a drastically long time to correct errors of his teaching, courtesy of human failure. Don’t you think?

Please remember that teachings supposed tobe those of Jesus came 1400 years after Moses. That was a much longer time compared to 600 years. Then they took some hundred years to be written down by unknown scribes. That makes 1500 years after Moses.

 

[Analyzer]

… I am personally okay with admitting that I do not have a conclusive answer for you), and it is certainly NOT evidence of truth in your fantasies regarding the “corrupted” nature of the Bible.

**If you have been just reading/following Catholic Douay Rheims Bible then you would have never known what was the first name of that notorious prisoner whose last name was Barabbas and even the meaning of Aamaic word ‘BARABBAS’.

Matthew 27:16** And he had then a notorious prisoner, that was called Barabbas.

drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=47&ch=27&l=16&f=s#x

You would not have know it, up until your another Bible (NAB) is translated into English just few decades ago, which shed some light on it…thought still this NAB too put his first name in brackets:

16 9 And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called (Jesus) Barabbas.

And the footnote says:

9 [16-17] [Jesus] Barabbas: it is possible that the double name is the original reading; Jesus was a common Jewish name; see the note on ⇒ Matthew 1:21. This reading is found in only a few textual witnesses, although its absence in the majority can be explained as an omission of Jesus made for reverential reasons. That name is bracketed because of its uncertain textual attestation. The Aramaic name Barabbas means “son of the father”; the irony of the choice offered between him and Jesus, the true son of the Father, would be evident to those addressees of Matthew who knew that.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PW0.HTM#$3AW

​

 

[Angelos]

**First, who cares/seeks “real” miracles/signs"?

“A wicked and (unfaithfull) adulterous generation seeketh after a sign.”

But the only miracle/sign Jesus was prepared to show/give was not** even fulfilled as per the understanding given to us by the majority of Christiandom, as for them Jesus was “crufcified” (actually curcificted) on Friday not on Wednesday.​

What an absurd post again! Multiple face Muslim poster, you deserve a golden medal in that category

How can the fulfilment of Jesus’ supposed sign be related to the day of His crucifixion according to the Gospels? You are talking through your Islamic hat again. Thanks for the laughter

 

[Angelos]

**If you have been just reading/following Catholic Douay Rheims Bible then you would have never known what was the first name of that notorious prisoner whose last name was Barabbas and even the meaning of Aamaic word ‘BARABBAS’.

Matthew 27:16** And he had then a notorious prisoner, that was called Barabbas.

drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=47&ch=27&l=16&f=s#x

You would not have know it, up until your another Bible (NAB) is translated into English just few decades ago, which shed some light on it…thought still this NAB too put his first name in brackets:

16 9 And at that time they had a notorious prisoner called (Jesus) Barabbas.

And the footnote says:

9 [16-17] [Jesus] Barabbas: it is possible that the double name is the original reading; Jesus was a common Jewish name; see the note on ⇒ Matthew 1:21. This reading is found in only a few textual witnesses, although its absence in the majority can be explained as an omission of Jesus made for reverential reasons. That name is bracketed because of its uncertain textual attestation. The Aramaic name Barabbas means “son of the father”; the irony of the choice offered between him and Jesus, the true son of the Father, would be evident to those addressees of Matthew who knew that.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PW0.HTM#$3AW

​

When a Christian criticises you for writing a post of impertinence, you renew your post with a better example of irrelevance. It seems that you have never found an occasion to personally meet Mr. Logic in your life.

 

[cathopologist]

Please remember that teachings supposed tobe those of Jesus came 1400 years after Moses. That was a much longer time compared to 600 years. Then they took some hundred years to be written down by unknown scribes. That makes 1500 years after Moses.

Mohammad’s scribes have been suspected to be gnostics. Whatever they copied into the Qur’an were mashed versions of Christianity and Judaism; filled with inadequate and inaccurate historical accounts of Judaism and Christianity. All this despite Islam’s claim to be factually correct. Besides, the Qur’an has been evolving since it was first written. I would rather read Dan Brown’s novels. At least his novels will still reflect his imbecile concoctions for generations to come. Free from humans tampering or editing his work.

 

[planten]

Mohammad’s scribes have been suspected to be gnostics. Whatever they copied into the Qur’an were mashed versions of Christianity and Judaism; filled with inadequate and inaccurate historical accounts of Judaism and Christianity. All this despite Islam’s claim to be factually correct. Besides, the Qur’an has been evolving since it was first written. I would rather read Dan Brown’s novels. At least his novels will still reflect his imbecile concoctions for generations to come. Free from humans tampering or editing his work.

**Then NT could be called a summarised mashed version of the bible OT. Quite possible. Because Jesus sat with the Jewish elders and learnt things lesson by lesson from them. Besides his carpentary, he had a hobby of taking lessons in Judaism. He was a very good Jew but Jews did not accept him.

Jews did not accept Jesus as their Messiah. But Muhammad admitted that he was the promised Messiah for the Jews.
**

 

[Angelos]

**Then NT could be called a summarised mashed version of the bible OT. Quite possible. Because Jesus sat with the Jewish elders and learnt things lesson by lesson from them. Besides his carpentary, he had a hobby of taking lessons in Judaism. He was a very good Jew but Jews did not accept him.

Jews did not accept Jesus as their Messiah. But Muhammad admitted that he was the promised Messiah for the Jews.
**

Mohammad acknowledged Jesus as the only Messiah without even knowing the sense of the word!

As for Jesus’ learning from Jewish elders, this is another LIE from you. It is evident that you have never read the Gospels.

 

[cathopologist]

**Then NT could be called a summarised mashed version of the bible OT. Quite possible. Because Jesus sat with the Jewish elders and learnt things lesson by lesson from them. Besides his carpentary, he had a hobby of taking lessons in Judaism. He was a very good Jew but Jews did not accept him.

Jews did not accept Jesus as their Messiah. But Muhammad admitted that he was the promised Messiah for the Jews.
**

You seriously have no knowledge on Christian and Jewish history, do you? Was Mohammad a Jew? Did he have a Jewish background - anywhere in his genealogy? Apart from having himself a trophy wife in the beginning of his career and several wives and concubines later, what else did he achieve that no other general before him had achieved before?